what a bazzarre, pre-accusation. body's not even cold yet, and you're suggesting that anyone who doesnt rule out conspiracy in a combination snipe & bomb that seals a coming election is a tin foil hat guy? like i said, you've got serious mental problems
No!!! Word is Musharaf was an OBL hit man! All I could tell you is that Musharaf was defenetly not a CIA man. How do you like me now dddooo?! Carry on on pushing your agenda buddy!
All this âjews are scumâ and âMuslims are terroristâ and âChristians are war mongersâ stuff is very interesting (not!). I personally think this Whole Bhutto thing will turn out to be a non event. But what if I'm wrong? If I'd been alive in 1914, I probably would have said the same thing about the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. So what are the possibilities of an escalation and widening of the so-called âwar on terrorâ? Do we, the US, really want the job to rebuild Pakistan also? If American soldiers invaded Pakistan, what would Joe six pack from India think about that? Could this be the beginnings of an all out WW III?
" If American soldiers invaded Pakistan, what would Joe six pack from India think about that?" he'd expect the American reservist to train the Indian H-1b who replaced him at his civilian job before the American went to fight for India I'm completely serious
No, train him (the Indian who comes to USA on H-1b visa) to take over the American's civilian job, tech in particular then, the American goes to fight for the benefit of India
We can. Muslims often kill in the name of Islam. This is apparently because there is an interpretation of the Qu'ran which includes the instructions that those who don't believe in the Prophet are 'infidels' and true believers can righteously kill them, preferably by beheading them with a sword. Bhutto's assassination shows that Radical Muslims will gladly kill other Muslims if it furthers their goals (assuming the conjecture is correct and this is the work of the hardcore Islamic fundamentalists, for whom a modern Westernized woman can never be President of the country). In the past 6 years we have seen thousands upon thousands of Muslims killed at the hands of their fellow Muslims because of their differing religious beliefs (Sunni/Shia) or differing religiously informed beliefs. Oddly, we do not see thousands of Jews killed at the hands of their fellow Jews. Christians kill each other too, but almost never for their religious beliefs. Usually it's over a crack deal. Buddhists rarely murder each other. Hindus sometimes do, but again, not because one guy likes Ganesha and the other guy prefers Vishnu. Radical Muslims also believe that modern life should be lived in the same way that life was lived 1000 years ago. This is not conjecture - they have explicitly stated that they reject many of the tenets of modern life, including gender equality and personal freedom of expression, ideals which have no place in fundamentalist Islamic thought. Radical Islam is unique in that it is the only religious sect whose adherents have specifically told me, in warnings aired on television, that I am a target of their attacks, by virtue of the fact that I am a Westerner. You said that school shootings occur in the U.S. Yes, but the shooters don't kill in the name of Christ. There is no other religion which produces so many adherents bent on murdering innocent people and gaining admission to heaven. No other religious group organizes camps dedicated to teaching young people how to martyr themselves. Possibly the promise of 89 virgins in heaven has something to do with this. Certainly there exist moderate Muslims who reject the idea that those who do not believe in Islam should be killed. However, in the years since Sept 11/2001, we in the West have been forced to deal with the fact that moderate Muslims (presumably the majority, although we can't tell) have remained largely silent on the issue. Possibly this is because these moderates would fear for their lives if they spoke out; after all, those radical Muslims have shown that they have no problem whatsoever in murdering anyone who steps out of line.
I make the mistake maybe of watching a national newscast, the lead story was about Bhutto's death. Here;s how it started: 1. First up they have an 'expert' who said the current dictator - Musharraf - had the LEAST to gain from her death because he can no longer form an alliance with her opposition party. Wait, let's review the facts: Musharraf recently declared martial law, rounded up and imprisioned his political opponents, took over the media and crushed free speech, and banned all protests. I ASK YOU - DOES THIS REMOTELY SOUND LIKE A GUY WHO WANTS TO HAVE A SHARED, PEACEFUL "ALLIANCE' WITH HIS POLITICAL OPPONENTS?? GOOD GRIEF. 2. They showed the firefighters washing the crime scene, the newscast said that forensic evidence would be lost. So NO investigation of this crime scene was done. So how do we know that "terrorists" did it> Every leader starting with bush said it was "terrorists" and they hope the perpertrators would be caught. OH REALLY? No investigation was done, evidence washed away. More B.S. 3. The newscast mentioned each of these words at least 5-10 times: chaos, fear, terrorists, nuclear, crisis. Not too obvious subliminal programing here, and they showed the required scene of Pakistanis tearing apart a US flag. Was that footage even from this event?? The Pakistanis on the ground were rioting AGAINT the current brutal dictator!! Sounds like a normal reaction by freedom-loving people to me. Once again we have another middle eastern country plunged into CHAOS by people who have a lot to gain. 4. With no investigation, they said that "Terrorists" killed Bhutto. Let's see now, bush said Musharraf is a 'vital ally in the war of terror'. So why would "terrorists" kill some has-been person like Bhutto who is not even in power, who was exiled, and completely ignore Musharraf who is supposedly their sworn enemy in the war against them and who is in power?? DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. 5. Another "expert" asked: how can we trust a country with nukes when they can't protect their leaders. First off, she was not in power and was even exiled, and the govt. refused to provide more security for her. Secondly, if presidential and political assasinations is any yardstick, the US should not have nukes... The message was clear: we need to submit to some kind of new authority who will "Save us", and that everyone over there is some kind of irrational, barbaric animal.
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. 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. ...When she held the reins of government, Bhutto did nothing to steer in a new direction - she merely sought to enhance her personal power. 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. http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly...utto_assassination__not_what_she_s_912265.htm