Bhutto controversy
The Pakistani government has taken a page out of the US government playoff. Keep throwing explanations at the public. The public will get tired before you have to give up the real answer.
I detailed the problems with the “official photo” in an earlier post. This video clear tells us that the doctors are being forced to be quiet. There was no autopsy. The physician’s notes don’t really make any sense. One doctor spoke out, sort of, “The government took all the medical records right after Ms. Bhutto’s time of death was read out,” said a visibly shaken doctor who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. Sweating and putting his head in his hands, he said: “Look, we have been told by the government to stop talking. And a lot of us feel this is a disgrace.” The medical report is here. It is incomplete.
Today, in an interview with foreign reporters, Pervez Musharraf cleared the air. He laid blame were it clearly belonged. “…Ms. Bhutto had defied the government’s warnings when she decided to go ahead with the rally in Rawalpindi, where she was killed a week ago. He added that she had broken standard security rules by standing in the open top of her vehicle as the crowd swarmed around her and by not leaving the rally quickly.”[NYT] Blaming the victim, always a great neocon strategy.
I don’t think that we will ever get the straight story on how Benazir Bhutto died. In my opinion, using only freely available information, I can say that Bhutto was shot without a doubt. She most likely died secondary to a gunshot wound. I don’t think that we will ever get the straight scoop on this story with the government cleaning the area after the shooting. I would guess that the CSI team would have a hard time getting the evidence after the Pakistani government has washed it away. Today, we heard that Scotland Yard is going to help with the investigation. We’ll see about the outcome. I don’t see how Scotland Yard can do anything but reinforce the official party line.
Benazir Bhutto’s tragic demise is yet another example of a political decision made through a violent act of murder. One wonders if the perpetrators of these acts really understand the long-range impact of their deeds. The act has already led to many other wrongful deaths in their country, and of their fellow supporters, and will lead to more as the reaction continues. If she was killed to preserve the present regime, then surely the government must understand that it has exposed itself to a greater harm in allowing her murder than it would have experienced in ensuring her safety. This means of assassination, like all murders of political voices for political reasons failed to accomplish their ends. They have now energized survivors and the living rightfully desire to recover the voice stolen from them. They have now formed, without their knowledge or intent, a new party in Pakistan. This will forever change the nation and what direction it will now take is unknowable but assuredly, it will replace the present government. You murderers need to realize that there is always a price exacted for innocent blood. Whatever deity you choose, murder is called thus because it is wrong. It is wrong in this case not only because it involves a greater effusion of innocent blood but also silences a voice that though you disagreed was necessary to enfranchise a segment of the Pakistani people that have a right to expression and life as much as you. Through your senseless act, “they now shall have it.” Well done!