What are we to make of Pakistan. The wests best hope of a peaceful future, Ms Bhutto, has, like her father, been killed in a bomb blast, or from a gunshot wound following the blast.

Ms Bhutto, who was pro western, was a pro American, pro Democracy leader.
Back to square one for the White House I think.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/12/27/pakistan.sharif/index.html

This is VERY bad.

From what I understand, Bhutto was shot and then the gunman blew himself up.

I just heard about this, and it infuriates me. More to follow.

Right Dharm-I thought from BBC News it was the other way around.

Someone shot her after the blast-whatever way, she was confirmed dead about 10 minutes ago.

It seem the extremist, by that I mean the Islamic side or Musharraf, one of them will be the instigator of this vile deed.

Its a bad day for Freedom and Democracy.

Where does this leave the White House and the 'War on Terror'?

Well, this certainly makes Pakistan a much more volatile place for the near future, which wouldn't be so bad except that they possess nuclear weapons.

Yeah they have nukes. Id say the next few days Pakistan will be very unstable.

Bhutto supporters will be coming onto the streets as we speak.

The military will be out also.

India will be on red alert, the Pentagon will be calling people in.

Maybe its about time Pakistan-whoever is in charge-lets US troops cross over in pursuit of AQ now, instead of playing the Bush Administration as they have been.

Id say patients is waring very very thin in America with this.

If we sent troops across the border now, it might inflame the islamic radicals and make things worse for the Pakistani government.

If we sent troops across the border now, it might inflame the islamic radicals and make things worse for the Pakistani government.Yes I would agree-things will have to settle down for sometime now and see what the Pakistani elections [if they go ahead] brings.

But up to now, Musharraf has done nothing that I can see to be in the position he's in regards the 'big picture'.

If I had got up-even once, and read that Pakistani Forces were driving AQ towards the Afghan border, were the USAF were waiting to vapourise them, then Id say yeah-go for it.

But all I hear is drivel, he doesnt want to upset the warlords, he doesnt want to upset Muslim Fundamentalists.

If thats the case, he should step aside and allow someone take action.

That someone has been murdered today.

And she was BRAVE!!!! What a tragedy!!! :mad: What are we to make of Pakistan. The wests best hope of a peaceful future, Ms Bhutto, has, like her father, been killed in a bomb blast, or from a gunshot wound following the blast.

Ms Bhutto, who was pro western, was a pro American, pro Democracy leader.
Back to square one for the White House I think.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/12/27/pakistan.sharif/index.html

She was a crook. Good riddance! Do you know she siphoned off billions of dollars of the public's money. I saw her house Dubai and it was probably worth $ 20 Million.

Why havn't they cancelled the elections yet?

The corruption case is a very serious issue and one which needs to be addressed.

There are suggestions of Swiss Bank Accounts with assets of $1.5 bn.

Pakistan, as a nation, has very little options, when it comes to a way forward,

at this moment in time-she may have been the best.

But good point DXB.

Wow, am I the only one here who listens to AirAmerica?

This morning's substitute host for Lionel talked to a Pakistani American and interviewed a reporter for The Progressive (a liberal, oh sorry, a progressive magazine). They both said that she was unlikely to win the election and that if she did, the population would have viewed her as an American puppet. The reporter also said the CIA wouldn't be involved in this because they liked her. She had likely worked with them in the past.

Another thing little reported about her is the fact that she did nothing as the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan because she thought it would be best for Pakistan.

And the "suggestions" of her corruption were verified by the Swiss government.

I'm sorry to speak ill of the deceased, but she was not the paragon of virtue and democracy that people will now be saying she is.

But I do believe she had the best interest of Pakistan as her motivation and she was very brave.
She faced death every day when certain politicians in this country lack the courage to debate on Fox News.

Thats correct Brooks [nice to see ya back by the way].

Her record against the Taliban was poor.

Corruption allegations plagued her.

Tho I think the White House was gearing itself to run with her as much as possible.

She was willing to allow US Forces to pursue AQ into Pakistan from Afghanistan-that may have been her death nail.

Wow, am I the only one here who listens to AirAmerica?

Whats your favorite show?

Mine are Thom Hartmann, Rachel Maddow (I'm sad they got rid of Kent Jones) and Ring of Fire. I have listened to a little bit of Lionel but I find him a little boring. I usually listen to the podcasts, but my Ipod has been down so I haven't been listening as much lately.


Another thing little reported about her is the fact that she did nothing as the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan because she thought it would be best for Pakistan.

Did they say what they thought she should have done exactly and why?



And the "suggestions" of her corruption were verified by the Swiss government.

Can you expand on this?
When did the Swiss become the final arbiters of who is or is not corrupt?


I'm sorry to speak ill of the deceased, but she was not the paragon of virtue and democracy that people will now be saying she is.

Is it your intention to speak ill of her?
I don't see anybody except you saying she was a "paragon of virtue and democracy."
She was definitely the lesser of evils when compared to the alternatives.


But I do believe she had the best interest of Pakistan as her motivation

Does not seem like it would be very smart for any politician not to.


She faced death every day when certain politicians in this country lack the courage to debate on Fox News.

Declining to subject themselves to Fox News has more to do with intelligence than courage.

Thats like criticizing them for lacking the "courage" to shoot themselves.
The criticism has nothing to do with the reality.

Whats so special about Fox News anyway ?

Whats so special about Fox News anyway ?

They are a blatantly right wing network that has a very loose relationship with the truth.

http://www.outfoxed.org/

This is one thing about America I simply dont understand.

Fox is owned by that famous Aussie socialist Murdoch, same as Sky News in

Europe.

Tho in Europe journalists pride themselves on keeping their political opinions to themselves-the opposite seems to happen in America.

Murdoch, a socialist?! :lolhit:

Yeah-power to the people.

Well those with over $10 million in da bank :)

Fox is owned by that famous Aussie socialist Murdoch,

(emphasis mine)
Thats a new one for me. Murdoch has been called a lot of things, but I have never heard anybody call him a socialist before.

From here: (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2004/07/b122948.html)
In recent years, Australian-born billionaire Rupert Murdoch has used the U.S. government's increasingly lax media regulations to consolidate his hold over the media and wider political debate in America.

MURDOCH THE WAR MONGER
MURDOCH THE NEOCONSERVATIVE
MURDOCH THE OIL IMPERIALIST
MURDOCH THE INTIMIDATOR
MURDOCH THE NEWS EDITOR
MURDOCH THE BUSH SUPPORTER
MURDOCH THE BUSH FAMILY EMPLOYER
MURDOCH THE MIXER OF BUSINESS AND POLITICS
MURDOCH THE NEW YORK CITY POLITICAL BOSS
MURDOCH THE DEFENDER OF REPRESSIVE REGIMES
MURDOCH THE APOLOGIST FOR DICTATORSHIPS
MURDOCH THE PROPAGANDIST FOR DICTATORS
MURDOCH THE ENABLER OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATORS
MURDOCH THE HIDER OF MONEY IN COMMUNIST CUBA
MURDOCH THE UNION BUSTER
MURDOCH THE CORPORATE TAX EVADER
MURDOCH THE LOVER OF OFFSHORE TAX HAVENS
MURDOCH THE ABUSER OF TAX LOOPHOLES

Yeah he is a bit of a scumbag.

Tho I will say-he seen the power and influence to be had in Americas media long long ago.

Another difference I find between US/EU.

Here people tend to read or watch a news or political item, then look at it from the other sides perspective before making up their minds.

Next youll be telling me Americans watch the commercials also :)

Whats your favorite show?

Mine are Thom Hartmann, Rachel Maddow (I'm sad they got rid of Kent Jones) and Ring of Fire. I have listened to a little bit of Lionel but I find him a little boring. Thom Hartmann is the Sean Hannity of the left. The political Readers Digest.
Pleasant voice, likeable, a good synopsis of the party line but no original thought. A bit too simplistic and predictable for me, like Hannity without the opposing view phone calls.

Lionel is eclectic and open minded which is why I don't think he'll last on AirAmerica. He is virulently anti-Bush, but I don't think his rhetoric is vitriolic enough for their format.

Thom Hartmann is the Sean Hannity of the left. The political Readers Digest.
Pleasant voice, likeable, a good synopsis of the party line but no original thought. A bit too simplistic and predictable for me, like Hannity without the opposing view phone calls.

As someone who has listened to both shows I feel very well qualified to say that you could not be more wrong on pretty much every point.



Lionel is eclectic and open minded which is why I don't think he'll last on AirAmerica. He is virulently anti-Bush, but I don't think his rhetoric is vitriolic enough for their format.

He is also pretty boring, which is why I don't think he will last.

Fox is owned by that famous Aussie socialist Murdoch, same as Sky News in I wasn't aware that he was a socialist, but he did run one of Hillary's biggest fundraisers to date, so he's a little hard to nail down.

He is also pretty boring, which is why I don't think he will last.You make a point.
People who tune in to hear EvilBushEvilBushEvilBush but instead hear about physics, evolution, jazz guitarists, comedians, history, politics, the law and science can find it a little disconcerting. Even a little boring.

But try it out.

I wasn't aware that he was a socialist, but he did run one of Hillary's biggest fundraisers to date, so he's a little hard to nail down.
Rupert Murdoch always backs winners-no matter what side of the fence they sit on.

Does he know something we dont ?

But try it out.

Apparently you missed the part of my post where I said I have listened to him. Must have been an oversight on your part. :hug:

I would make the same suggestion for you about Thom Hartmann. It seems quite clear from your comments you have never listened to his show at all. One of his main themes is debating with conservatives and if you disagree with him on something when you call in you go to the front of the line. He gets many compliments from conservative and liberal callers about what a great show he has and how he is one of the only people who actually lets conservatives talk and make their points, which is something Hannity definitely does not do for liberals.

If you are expecting bushisevilbushisevil (which, apparently you are), you aren't going to get that on on Thom Hartmann or Rachel Maddow.

From Pakistan to Air America? Get a room you guys.

From Pakistan to Air America? Get a room you guys.

Thank you! Now, the swiss would know she is corrupt since where else would she get 1.5 Billion! She is a fucking crook. She got what was coming to her!

You make a point.
People who tune in to hear EvilBushEvilBushEvilBush but instead hear about physics, evolution, jazz guitarists, comedians, history, politics, the law and science can find it a little disconcerting. Even a little boring.

But try it out.

Hmm,if'n yuz got somethin ta say,then Dagnabbit let it out :

Already

Thank you! Now, the swiss would know she is corrupt since where else would she get 1.5 Billion! She is a fucking crook. She got what was coming to her!

The Swiss Are very Proud and Neutral folk.
When I visited Lucerne at the Carlton,i was struck by how
even dogs could be seated in a nice restaurant,when at Lunchtime
the Banks are all closed.

When did the Swiss become the final arbiters of who is or is not corrupt?
if the Swiss say you're bad news, you can take it to the bank. :slap:


they know who's evil, they knowingly took gold looted from holocaust victims for Christ's sake:rolleyes:

They are a blatantly right wing network that has a very loose relationship with the truth.

http://www.outfoxed.org/
as opposed to Dan Rather's evasion of it like a crazed xgf.

if the Swiss say you're bad news, you can take it to the bank. :slap:


they know who's evil, they knowingly took gold looted from holocaust victims for Christ's sake:rolleyes:

No way Jose.The Swiss are crafty aloof.They seem to tolerate
Heroin addicts,as long as they remain in parks,outside of the
VERY meticulously clean City's.
And they don't like ANY outsiders.
No matter how wealthy one is,in order to gain citizenship in
Switzerland requires much more than merely Marrige to a naturalized
Swiss resident.I think the statute of residency for an American who
Marries a Swiss on a Visa visit is 7 years.

No way Jose.The Swiss are crafty aloof.They seem to tolerate
Heroin addicts,as long as they remain in parks,outside of the
VERY meticulously clean City's.
And they don't like ANY outsiders.
No matter how wealthy one is,in order to gain citizenship in
Switzerland requires much more than merely Marrige to a naturalized
Swiss resident.I think the statute of residency for an American who
Marries a Swiss on a Visa visit is 7 years.


ok..now we return to our normal programming.. back to Bhutto hiding billions in swiss account....

Thank you! Now, the swiss would know she is corrupt since where else would she get 1.5 Billion! She is a fucking crook. She got what was coming to her!
I still would have taken her over Musharraf or some bin Laden spawn.

if the Swiss say you're bad news, you can take it to the bank.



"take it to the bank"... interesting choice of words.
The Swiss themselves have been called the most corrupt nation in Europe (http://weave.nine.ch/domains/taxjustice4africa.net/cms/upload/pdf/AllAfrica_Com_-_Switzerland_most_corrupt_country_-_6_JUN_2005.pdf) for providing safe haven for so many criminals and their stolen money.

I still would have taken her over Musharraf or some bin Laden spawn.

Exactly, nobody claimed she was perfect (let alone a "paragon of virtue"), just the lesser of evils.

as opposed to Dan Rather's evasion of it like a crazed xgf.
At least CBS (and Dan Rather) has a reputation that can be trashed.

"take it to the bank"... interesting choice of words.
The Swiss themselves have been called the most corrupt nation in Europe (http://weave.nine.ch/domains/taxjustice4africa.net/cms/upload/pdf/AllAfrica_Com_-_Switzerland_most_corrupt_country_-_6_JUN_2005.pdf) for providing safe haven for so many criminals and their stolen money.
me use a pun? never:corn:

At least CBS (and Dan Rather) has a reputation that can be trashed.
no, they've been riding Walter Cronkite's.

Exactly, nobody claimed she was perfect (let alone a "paragon of virtue"), just the lesser of evils.

Why? What did she do for Pakistan when she was in power? Nothing...look accross the border into India (which is still a peice of shit), but not such a huge pile compared to Pakistan.

no, they've been riding Walter Cronkite's.
Compared to any regular Fox News correspondent, just about everybody looks like Walter Cronkite.

Heard on AirAmerica today: If we didn't invade Iraq, Bhutto would not have been assassinated.

Of course the fact that Ramsay Yusef almost pulled it off in the early 90's is irrelevant.

Heard on AirAmerica today: If we didn't invade Iraq, Bhutto would not have been assassinated.

In all likeliness.


Of course the fact that Ramsay Yusef almost pulled it off in the early 90's is irrelevant.

Did he? I have never heard that before. It is interesting, but largely irrelevant to the situation today.

:thumbs:

Why? What did she do for Pakistan when she was in power? Nothing...look accross the border into India (which is still a peice of shit), but not such a huge pile compared to Pakistan.

She said she would allow the U.S. to cross the border from Afghanistan to pursue Al Queda in Pakistan where they are currently being protected by the peace treaty they signed with Musharreff.

In all likeliness.

Creative vocabulary aside, I don't get your point.

[QUOTE=Brooks]Heard on AirAmerica today: If we didn't invade Iraq, Bhutto would not have been assassinated.

If'n Georgy Porgy never ran fer pres,the folk like Air Merica
wood still insist he or someone like he,was responsible for
damn near every ill that came down the Pike.
That's the Pathology of an Air America.
They virtually cannot subsist w/o a self-perpetuating Villian.
That's their Charm,their Gleam and their Wont.
All bundled-up and packaged like a Christmas Toy.

Creative vocabulary aside, I don't get your point.

If we had not been sidetracked into Iraq we probably would have already caught Bin Laden and Al Queda would not be sitting comfortably in Pakistan under the protection of a peace treaty with Mushareff.

If we had not been sidetracked into Iraq we probably would have already caught Bin Laden and Al Queda would not be sitting comfortably in Pakistan under the protection of a peace treaty with Mushareff.
My sentiments exactly.

If we had not been sidetracked into Iraq we probably would have already caught Bin Laden and Al Queda would not be sitting comfortably in Pakistan under the protection of a peace treaty with Mushareff.

More likely is that you would've won the lottery.

Benazir Bhutto was defiantly a brave woman. President Pervez Musharraf decision not to protect Pakistan's next President was for his benefit alone.

Benazir Bhutto was defiantly a brave woman. President Pervez Musharraf decision not to protect Pakistan's next President was for his benefit alone.

It also benefits Al Queda who is protected by the peace treaty they signed with Musharaff.

If we had not been sidetracked into Iraq we probably would have already caught Bin Laden and Al Queda would not be sitting comfortably in Pakistan under the protection of a peace treaty with Mushareff.So Bhutto would be alive today?
The AA host said it as fact.
Do you?

So Bhutto would be alive today?
The AA host said it as fact.
Do you?

I am not sure what your point is.

Are you saying for a fact that she would not be alive today?

We cannot say that if the US had not invaded iraq that Bhutto would not have died. She died because she put her own life in grave danger.

But - for sure, if we'd spent the time & money on tracking down AQ as we have wasting time & money in Iraq then for sure AQ would be history, instead of regrowing by the day. Perhaps even more to the point - without Iraq then AQ wouldn't have a reason to even exist at this stage.

The iraq invasion was like a birthday-christmas present all rolled into one for AQ - and I bet they just loved those pallet wrapped mamoth bundles of $100 bills we supplied them & they are just loving the terrorist school we have created for them. Iraq is like the westpoint for terrorist training - all funded by the US tax $

After Bush allowed AQ leadership to slip away in Afghanistan, and turned his attention to Iraq, it did make Iraq the focus of every young angry Muslim
who was easily brain washed into blaming America for anything and everything. And indeed it was a god send to AQ.

So while America was sending its young men to Iraq, AQ was making deals
and agreements with war lords and Pakistani Intelligence sympathisers, virtually guaranteeing them immunity in the Jammu and Kashmir region.

AQ itself is more a brand name like 'McDonald's', giving out franchise's to
anyone who wants to attack western interests.

My own opinion would be for the US to target Northern Pakistan with Satellite
surveillance, and when it acquires targets, send a cruise missile after the target. AQ leadership need to know there's nowhere to hide in safety.

Then you ll see who's side Pakistan really is on.

We cannot say that if the US had not invaded iraq that Bhutto would not have died. She died because she put her own life in grave danger.

But - for sure, if we'd spent the time & money on tracking down AQ as we have wasting time & money in Iraq then for sure AQ would be history, instead of regrowing by the day. Perhaps even more to the point - without Iraq then AQ wouldn't have a reason to even exist at this stage.

The iraq invasion was like a birthday-christmas present all rolled into one for AQ - and I bet they just loved those pallet wrapped mamoth bundles of $100 bills we supplied them & they are just loving the terrorist school we have created for them. Iraq is like the westpoint for terrorist training - all funded by the US tax $

given that we know AQ has relocated to pakistan, how would anything done in iraq changed our ability to debilitate AQ any more than we have?

After Bush allowed AQ leadership to slip away in Afghanistan, and turned his attention to Iraq, it did make Iraq the focus of every young angry Muslim
who was easily brain washed into blaming America for anything and everything. And indeed it was a god send to AQ.

So while America was sending its young men to Iraq, AQ was making deals
and agreements with war lords and Pakistani Intelligence sympathisers, virtually guaranteeing them immunity in the Jammu and Kashmir region.

AQ itself is more a brand name like 'McDonald's', giving out franchise's to
anyone who wants to attack western interests.

My own opinion would be for the US to target Northern Pakistan with Satellite
surveillance, and when it acquires targets, send a cruise missile after the target. AQ leadership need to know there's nowhere to hide in safety.

Then you ll see who's side Pakistan really is on.

They've been doing that for at least two years.

Haven't seen any missiles land on AQ in Pakistan if thats the case.

I don't normally look at these kinds of things but this video raises an important question:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vq-DwHXx4oI

Why is the Musharraf government lying about the cause of Bhutto's death?

I don't normally look at these kinds of things but this video raises an important question:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vq-DwHXx4oI

Why is the Musharraf government lying about the cause of Bhutto's death?

*************************
Why is it,You and the other Ilk cloven seem to rely almost
exclusively on Links or Video's OR what someone else said.?
Imagine a Real leader so beholdin to such Fauntleroy.
I'm interested in what men think.Real Men.Not some Prissy
little poster boy who tries to make Notes with a bad Tuba.

Why is it,You and the other Ilk cloven seem to rely almost
exclusively on Links or Video's OR what someone else said.?The video shows what happened.

If you don't want to know what really happened that's your problem.

The video shows what happened.

If you don't want to know what really happened that's your problem.

The mark of a True Man,isn't how easy it is for him to be
swayed or gotten the attention of.Sometimes Life is like a
Used Car Lot.If ya don't have experience then yer primed to be
fleeced.I'm a Hard sell.I've been thru the mill.
A person can't go thru a single day,w/o someone tryin to pull
somethin or sell ya somethin ya don't need.
Why would Politics or Opinions of other's be any different.?
It's highly prudent of a wise man,to scoff at rather than be delighted by.
And that's a Fact.

I don't normally look at these kinds of things but this video raises an important question:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vq-DwHXx4oI

Why is the Musharraf government lying about the cause of Bhutto's death?
they're willing to allow the body to be exhumed, don't be so sure they are.

there's a lot of hair and scarf there. you'd only have to get close to the neck to make it move around.

either way, does it really matter? the effect is the same, and the exact cause is only a detail. the root cause is still the massive security lapse that allowed the assassin(s?) near her.

Shot in the neck... it seems.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=SNX3VRM51D5GVQFIQMGCFFWAVCBQ UIV0?xml=/news/2007/12/30/wbhutto130.xml

The video shows what happened.

If you don't want to know what really happened that's your problem.

Spot on - I watched that video & it's conclusive she was shot at, although her head could have just moved once she heard the shots.

I'm not sure why the Paki government would lie about it though - they have no reason to say she wasn't shot if she was.

I read that Bhutto was the only person killed in the white 4x4, which was armoured plated.

I suppose it is feasible that she died from smacking her head against the side of the sun roof, tho lead poisining looks more likely.

Im wondering if there is some internal power struggle at play with the conflicting stories about how she died.

I am not sure what your point is.
Are you saying for a fact that she would not be alive today?
No. Unlike Air America I'm saying we'll never know.

No. Unlike Air America I'm saying we'll never know.

Which show on Air America says that? Lionel again?
I know for a fact that they do not all say the same things.

Happy New Year!
:thumbs:

Which show on Air America says that? Lionel again?
No, the dopey sub-host.

Bo Biden just raised the stakes today: "If my father were President, Benazir Bhutto would be alive today".
(On Air America)

"raised the stakes"?

What are "the stakes", exactly?

What are "the stakes", exactly?
According to Bo anyway, a vote against his father is a vote to increase the chances of future political assassinations. Those are big stakes. AND A CHANCE WE CANNOT TAKE.

Of course it's moot now, isn't it.

Of course it's moot now, isn't it.

It was probably moot before too.