Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto was killed Thursday in a suicide attack (http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5iMb1loHZGB66_sDe0r78rgKiE5kQ) as she drove away from a campaign rally attended by thousands of supporters, aides said.

The attacker struck shortly after Bhutto addressed the crowd in the garrison city of Rawalpindi. There were conflicting accounts over the sequence of events. Rehman Malik, Bhutto's security adviser, said Bhutto was shot in the neck and chest by the attacker, who then blew himself up.

Party supporter Chaudry Mohammed Nazir said that two gunshots rang out when Bhutto's vehicle pulled into the main street and then there was a big blast next to her car.

But Javed Iqbal Cheema, spokesman for the Interior Ministry, told state-run Pakistan Television that Bhutto died when a suicide bomber struck her vehicle.

At least 20 others were killed in the blast, according to an Associated Press reporter at the scene.

Bhutto was rushed to the hospital and taken into emergency surgery.

"At 6:16 p.m. she expired," said Wasif Ali Khan, a member of Bhutto's party who was at Rawalpindi General Hospital.

What now for Pakistan?

“The assassination of Benazir Bhutto is a tragic event for Pakistan and for democracy in Pakistan. Her murderers must be brought to justice and Pakistan must continue the path back to democracy and the rule of law. Her death is a reminder that terrorism anywhere — whether in New York, London, Tel-Aviv or Rawalpindi — is an enemy of freedom. We must redouble our efforts to win the Terrorists' War on Us.” Rudy Giuliani

YouTube - Rudy Giuliani TV Ad, "Freedom" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3tt8dniJXc)

I hope it unites the Pakistani's in a common effort to erradicate the jihadist threat in their country . Who killed Benazir Bhutto? The main suspects - Times Online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article3100052.ece)

“We terminated the most precious American asset which vowed to defeat [the] mujahadeen,” Al-Qaeda's commander and main spokesperson Mustafa Abu Al-Yazid told Adnkronos International (AKI) in a phone call from an unknown location, speaking in faltering English. Al-Yazid is the main al-Qaeda commander in Afghanistan.

It is believed that the decision to kill Bhutto, who is the leader of the opposition Pakistan People's Party (PPP), was made by al-Qaeda No. 2, the Egyptian doctor, Ayman al-Zawahiri in October.

Death squads were allegedly constituted for the mission and ultimately one cell comprising a defunct Lashkar-i-Jhangvi's Punjabi volunteer succeeded in killing Bhutto.


AKI - Adnkronos international Pakistan: Al-Qaeda claims Bhutto's death (http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/Security/?id=1.0.1710322437)

But while Musharraf attacks AQ he should reserve some assets to clean out the ISI once and for all .

Steve

No surprise here . It didn't take long for some to blame President Bush .

at-Largely: Freedom is on the Farce... (http://www.atlargely.com/2007/12/freedom-is-on-t.html)

Dave Chandler's Earthside.com: Bush-Musharraf Behind Bhutto Assassination? (http://www.earthside.com/earthside/2007/12/bush-musharraf.html)


Even though AQ claimed credit and Bhutto repeatedly blamed jihadists for attacks on her,and spent her life condemning jihadism , it doesn't stop the BDS epidemic .

Steve

No surprise here . It didn't take long for some to blame President Bush .

at-Largely: Freedom is on the Farce... (http://www.atlargely.com/2007/12/freedom-is-on-t.html)

Dave Chandler's Earthside.com: Bush-Musharraf Behind Bhutto Assassination? (http://www.earthside.com/earthside/2007/12/bush-musharraf.html)


Even though AQ claimed credit and Bhutto repeatedly blamed jihadists for attacks on her,and spent her life condemning jihadism , it doesn't stop the BDS epidemic .

LOL, that was my next question, who'd be the first to blame Bush?


Consequently the sad truth behind what has occurred is obvious

Oh yes, the fearmongers will be out in force today.

I was just wondering, how many Islamo-fascist terrorist attacks does it take for someone suffering from BDS to understand the threat?

The Kossacks are it, too of course:

Bhutto dead - another Bush/Cheney plot for more war? (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/12/27/121622/91/295/426847)


This whole situation raises some questions for me. Anyone with a brain (evidently, Bush excepted) knew when Bhutto went back to Pakistan and was almost immediately assassinated that she would probably end up dead. I'd hate to think that our government was too incompetent to realize this, too. So if they knew, then why DID they send her back? To destabilize Pakistan?

Not only are Bush and Cheney behind the plot, they're the ones that sent her back to Pakistan!


Something I wonder about is since Cheney was blocked in his desire to invade Iran, perhaps he refocused on Pakistan. And since Iraq has created such a stench among the American public, he would need an "event" to trigger some kind of additional conflict. Voilà, Al Qaeda offs America's big partner in Pakistan, and all Cheney's goons run around on TV talking up how critical Pakistan is to our future.

I also recall several Democratic candidates saying they would put boots on the ground in Pakistan to control the Al Qaeda influence there. Perhaps Cheney saw this as an invitation to instigate. We mustn't forget that Pakistan ALSO has oil that Cheney's buddies would like to get their hands on, and Cheney has plenty of pals in the military-industrial complex who could still gouge the treasury with their billing hoaxes if a war were broadened to Pakistan.

Aha, so Bhutto died for Haliburton!


Then there's the upcoming Presidential election where Republicans are projected to lose badly at every level of government. Something big and nasty would certainly help the Republicans (in their minds) assert some electoral strength.

Now we're getting somewhere, if it isn't Cheney refocusing on Pakistan since he didn't get his way with Iran, and if it isn't about oil, it must be an election strategy.


Sometimes I think the people we have in charge aren't working to protect the US, but are working to destroy it. It's hard for me to believe that these people could be stupid enough not to anticipate this. We're supposed to believe they put all their eggs in this basket, and now it's a catastrophe because the expected thing happened?

This is conspiracy territory, but so was the talk about the run up to the Iraq war until the data started coming out that proved the conspiracy true. For me, as long as Bush/Cheney are in office, considering the unthinkable is a necessary function of being a good citizen because they have NO ETHICS.

Being a conspiracy theorist is necessary for being a good citizen?


What do you think is going on in the "back story" to this story? Do you think Bush/Cheney are operating as they appear to be, or is something shady going on? What's the end game?

I've seen too much crap from these guys to take them at their word. Something is up, and this doesn't pass the sniff test. They've forked over billions of dollars to Pakistan - what is their REAL goal? They seem to like to go after Al Qaeda until it looks like they're getting too close to their boy Bin Laden. Are they trying to fight Al Qaeda, or protect them?

Finally, the truth is out - Bush is in cahoots with bin Laden.


Was talking Bhutto and Musharaf into bringing Bhutto back to stabilize Pakistan, or to allow Al Qaeda to gain insurgence there? When you dangle a juicy carrot..

Seems this Kossack is the one taking the bait...

http://msunderestimated.com/CheneyVader.jpg

LOL, Darth Cheney :)

Good thing Darth Cheney and President Bush have secretly (until the NY Slimes revealed the classified information that is http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/washington/18nuke.html?_r=1&ref=asia&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin) been working with the Pakistani government to secure their nukes in the event of turmoil.

My question too when I saw this - what now for Pakistan? I remember her interview with Wolf Blitzer, saying she knew the forces against her and yet was not afraid for herself. May her death be avenged by the people gaining a democratic country.

I agree ,but more likely the elections will be further delayed . Musharraf will more likely extend martial law and for the moment postpone the elections . The big fear is that he will have to divert needed resources that would be used against AQ to deal with crowd control. Already there are reports of violent demonstations in Pakistani cities.

This was timed well by AQ . Radical jihadists in the outlands are returning to their safe-haven towns and villages for the winter . But the President will need to spend valuable time stabilizing the country before he resumes the assault on AQ and their supporters . If they can get democratic forces and the government to battle it only serves their purpose .

After the shouting and finger pointing stops it will come to nothing; she was fairly ineffectual while in office and out.

After the shouting and finger pointing stops it will come to nothing; she was fairly ineffectual while in office and out.


True enough .She was young and pretty corrupt her first go around . There was a hope that she was genuine this time . She certainly talked the talk. We will never know . The hope was of course that she and Musharaff could work together in coalition against AQ .

Aitzaz Ahsan who will probably take over her party is not likely to work as well with Musharaff. Ahsan was the chief counsel for the former Supreme Court Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, who's ouster by Musharaff recently caused a middle class riot.Ahsan disagreed with Bhutto's more conciliatory stance toward Musharraf.

May her death be avenged by the people gaining a democratic country.


Perhaps if fortune dictates ,the irony will be that jihadists ,who have used martyrdom in their cult of death as a means to create the next califate, may have inadvertently created a Muslim martyr for freedom.

DC ,martyrdom often masks ones weakness. By the time the MSM is finished with her ,I imagine she will have been given the anointed status of the equivalence of the American Founding fathers .

I don't know, Tom. Bhutto may not be the rallying point some would want her to be. Ralph Peters has some very nasty things to say about her.


THE BHUTTO ASSASSINATION: NOT WHAT SHE SEEMED TO BE (http://www.nypost.com/seven/12282007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/the_bhutto_assassination__not_what_she_s_912265.ht m)
By RALPH PETERS
December 28, 2007 -- FOR the next several days, you're going to read and hear a great deal of pious nonsense in the wake of the assassination of Pakistan's former prime minister, Benazir Bhutto.

Her country's better off without her. She may serve Pakistan better after her death than she did in life.

We need have no sympathy with her Islamist assassin and the extremists behind him to recognize that Bhutto was corrupt, divisive, dishonest and utterly devoid of genuine concern for her country.

She was a splendid con, persuading otherwise cynical Western politicians and "hardheaded" journalists that she was not only a brave woman crusading in the Islamic wilderness, but also a thoroughbred democrat.

In fact, Bhutto was a frivolously wealthy feudal landlord amid bleak poverty. The scion of a thieving political dynasty, she was always more concerned with power than with the wellbeing of the average Pakistani. Her program remained one of old-school patronage, not increased productivity or social decency.

Educated in expensive Western schools, she permitted Pakistan's feeble education system to rot - opening the door to Islamists and their religious schools.

During her years as prime minister, Pakistan went backward, not forward. Her husband looted shamelessly and ended up fleeing the country, pursued by the courts. The Islamist threat - which she artfully played both ways - spread like cancer.

But she always knew how to work Westerners - unlike the hapless Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who sought the best for his tormented country but never knew how to package himself.

Military regimes are never appealing to Western sensibilities. Yet, there are desperate hours when they provide the only, slim hope for a country nearing collapse. Democracy is certainly preferable - but, unfortunately, it's not always immediately possible. Like spoiled children, we have to have it now - and damn the consequences.

In Pakistan, the military has its own forms of graft; nonetheless, it remains the least corrupt institution in the country and the only force holding an unnatural state together. In Pakistan back in the '90s, the only people I met who cared a whit about the common man were military officers.

Americans don't like to hear that. But it's the truth.

Bhutto embodied the flaws in Pakistan's political system, not its potential salvation. Both she and her principal rival, former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, failed to offer a practical vision for the future - their political feuds were simply about who would divvy up the spoils.

From its founding, Pakistan has been plagued by cults of personality, by personal, feudal loyalties that stymied the development of healthy government institutions (provoking coups by a disgusted military). When she held the reins of government, Bhutto did nothing to steer in a new direction - she merely sought to enhance her personal power.

Now she's dead. And she may finally render her country a genuine service (if cynical party hacks don't try to blame Musharraf for their own benefit). After the inevitable rioting subsides and the spectacular conspiracy theories cool a bit, her murder may galvanize Pakistanis against the Islamist extremists who've never gained great support among voters, but who nonetheless threaten the state's ability to govern.

As a victim of fanaticism, Bhutto may shine as a rallying symbol with a far purer light than she cast while alive. The bitter joke is that, while she was never serious about freedom, women's rights and fighting terrorism, the terrorists took her rhetoric seriously - and killed her for her words, not her actions.

Nothing's going to make Pakistan's political crisis disappear - this crisis may be permanent, subject only to intermittent amelioration. (Our State Department's policy toward Islamabad amounts to a pocket full of platitudes, nostalgia for the 20th century and a liberal version of the white man's burden mindset.)

The one slim hope is that this savage murder will - in the long term - clarify their lot for Pakistan's citizens. The old ways, the old personalities and old parties have failed them catastrophically. The country needs new leaders - who don't think an election victory entitles them to grab what little remains of the national patrimony.

In killing Bhutto, the Islamists over-reached (possibly aided by rogue elements in Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence, one of the murkiest outfits on this earth). Just as al Qaeda in Iraq overplayed its hand and alienated that country's Sunni Arabs, this assassination may disillusion Pakistanis who lent half an ear to Islamist rhetoric.

A creature of insatiable ambition, Bhutto will now become a martyr. In death, she may pay back some of the enormous debt she owes her country.

Elliot

Peter's makes mine and DC's point in his last paragraph.

My bigger concern however is that the democrats in the country will go after the government and foment an Iranian style revolution. We must remember that a good part of the overthrow of the Shah was by democratic forces .Their revolution was later completely hijacked by the Mullahs.

Yeah Tom, there is the possibility of martyrdom in the cards… especially with sound bites and pictures like this: Afghan President Hamid Karzai praised her as a "very, very brave woman" who "sacrificed her life for the sake of Pakistan and the sake of this region."
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/images/smlissues122807.jpg

Yup the cannonizaton has begun . This was in my local paper today :

With her death -- as with John F. Kennedy's -- the glow of a modern day Camelot dims.Middle East Online (http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=23697)

Quite an epitaph from her Professor of History. I found her position on government and religion surprising for anyone from that part of the world:

“Her views on the necessity of separating religion from government had become far more rigid than mine.”

Dear ETWolverine,

Peters sums it up well. Both Musharef and Bhutto were supporters of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban at different points in their lives and political careers, so neither they nor their pro-Islamist opponents are angels.

To answer Speechlesstx's question with a question, the real thing to ask now is: "What now for the world?"

Pakistan's nukes were in shaky hands at best with Musharef, Bhutto, and past regimes. If other Islamofascist factions that aren't so diplomatic get control of them, who knows what may come next? The nukes or their radioactive material may end up in the hands of an Iran, a Saudi Arabia, or Islamofascist terrorists within the U.S. or elsewhere in the West.

"Interesting times" indeed.

So... what you think about Hilary trying to align herself with Bhutto's legacy? I saw where she (Hilary) was interviewed and said glowing things about Bhutto and called her a friend and more.

So... what you think about Hilary trying to align herself with Bhutto's legacy? I saw where she (Hilary) was interviewed and said glowing things about Bhutto and called her a friend and more.

Evita was just trying to take advantage of the situation, the latest in her continuing quest to "soften" her image, relate to women, expand her foreign policy resume... just another campaign moment.