More than 40 killed in violence following Bhutto’s death.
By on Dec 30th, 2007 at 9:29 am
More than 40 killed in violence following Bhutto’s death.
In the days since former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was assassinated, “nationwide rioting” has “brought life in Pakistan to a standstill.” Yesterday, as “the death toll from the violence climbed above 40,” government officials began “to consider delaying next month’s elections.” Center for American Progress Senior Fellow Brian Katulis writes: “As violence escalates, a temporary postponement of the elections might be best not just for stability but also for the sake of Pakistan’s democratic process.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
29 Responses to “More than 40 killed in violence following Bhutto’s death.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bailout
Big Oil
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Earmarks
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
GI Bill
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
McClellan
Media
Military
O'Hanlon
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Politics
Race
Radical Right
RNC Convention
Rove
Terrorism
Third Bush Term
Torture
Veterans
Women's Rights
ArchivesBlog Roll
I’m sick of this Bhutto stuff.
Weve got our own problems in America and GW Bush and the Republicans are to blame.
Enough about Pakistan already.
Lets focus on how Much Bush F@*Ked up everything so we can elect more Democrats ( better ones too - no more “blue dogs” aka republican lite )
Republicans , FOX news and CNN are just using this assasination for fear ratings anyway.
December 30th, 2007 at 9:34 amAmazing!! I was wondering how long it would take one of you left nut libs to bring up our great President because, let’s face it, George Bush is the cause of EVERYTHING that happens in the world!!
December 30th, 2007 at 9:36 amComment by John Kerry — December 30, 2007 @ 9:36 am
I think you mean that Bush has been a GRATE president, as one who is irritating. He is a great example of what is wrong in this country as opposed to trools like you who are meerly minor irritations.
December 30th, 2007 at 9:48 amYeah, let’s ignore the backlash of the assassination of the major political opponent of Mushareff. Let’s just forget that Pakistan is a nuclear power, and not worry at all about postponed elections, the possibility of a civil war, Bush involving American troops, because….
December 30th, 2007 at 9:51 amWell, I can’t figure out why we’d want to ignore that…
Was Benazir Bhutto Shot? Hit By shrapnel from a suicide bomber ? Killed by hitting her head on a door latch??
Doctors who examined her, Govt.spokesman, political supporters… they all have conflicting stories. Her husband refused to authorize an autopsy. She was buried quickly, before any cause of death could be confirmed.
None of this matters to the unfortunate victim, but it adds to the suspicion and rumor in Pakistan, and does not bode well for the stabilty and competency of this Nuclear Nation.
December 30th, 2007 at 10:03 amDoctors who examined her, Govt.spokesman, political supporters… they all have conflicting stories. Her husband refused to authorize an autopsy. She was buried quickly, before any cause of death could be confirmed.
Comment by Badger — December 30, 2007 @ 10:03 am
Muslims traditionally bury the dead within 24 hours of their death.
December 30th, 2007 at 10:13 amObviously she was shot first, did you see the photos vbideos of the shooter?
Who cares?
USA is 10 Trillion in debt. The dollar could lose 90% of its value tomorrow.
Thats a bigger worry.
Then we’ll have $900 / barrel oil. Then lets see who cares about some obscure corrupt politician killed in Pakistan.
If any of those Pakistan nukes get loose and used, Pakistan will be annihilated completely. And the pakistanis know that. So dont worry about their few nuclear weapons.
December 30th, 2007 at 10:25 amThis is a major concern. Pakistan had nuclear weapons. Even more unsettling is the quick, extremely quick rush to judgment that it was Al Quaeda that was responsible. Wouldn’t you think they’d focus all their energy on going after Musharif? Isn’t he G. W.’s good friend.. an enemy of terrorism? OH!!! and what do you know… A new Osama tape has just been released. I know. Throw me on top of the pile with all those other conspiracy nuts, but I’m more and more convinced Osama doesn’t even really exist. He’s been such a great and extremely convenient tool for the neo-con agenda. Truly frightening stuff.
December 30th, 2007 at 10:59 amSorry.. change that to Pakistan HAS nuclear weapons. (gulp)
December 30th, 2007 at 11:00 amBhutto has already stated that OBL is dead.
December 30th, 2007 at 11:10 amKibaki reelected
Bhuttos son Zadari new leader of Pakistans PPP
December 30th, 2007 at 11:14 amOsama is dead.
Its useful for Al quaeda and bush / neocons to make everybody think hes alive
how would bin landen not be able to get a small 300$ vid cam and say on video :
“I am OBL . Today is December 30th 2007, Bush is bla bla bla, Iraq is bla bla bla”
he could give heaps of topical information in 1 minute. Everybody would instanlty know its current and real.
OBL is now a hoax used to generate fear for republicans and fund raising for al quaeda.
December 30th, 2007 at 11:22 amComment by CaptainMantastic — December 30, 2007 @ 10:29 am
Aside from condemming this assassination. what exactly IS Bush’s position???
Joe Biden comes closest….Bush does not have a Pakistan policy, Bush has a Musharif policy.
Islamist groups attempting to deny democracy/??? seems like they are USING democracy to gain power. In Gaza with Hamas, in Lebanon with Hizbolah, and in Shiite areas of Iraq who favor sharia law. That’s why Bush’s push for Democracy, without a Bill of Rights, is flawed and backfiring.
Should we intervene in an attempt to help them? Yes but VERY Carefully. Heaven help us if we intervene like we did in Iraq.
December 30th, 2007 at 11:26 amNEWS FLASH…folks in the Middle East don’t particularily like America’s foreign policy.
George Bush is the cause of EVERYTHING that happens in the world!!-JK
Please, he is no legend like McCain [snark]
Condaleeza did have a hand in bringing her out o exile, and back into Palistan,I wonder why they didnt help more with her security [IE contractors] if they wanted her to share power with Musharraf.
December 30th, 2007 at 11:27 amIslamist groups attempting to deny democracy/??? seems like they are USING democracy to gain power. In Gaza with Hamas, in Lebanon with Hizbolah, and in Shiite areas of Iraq who favor sharia law. That’s why Bush’s push for Democracy, without a Bill of Rights, is flawed and backfiring.
Should we intervene in an attempt to help them? Yes but VERY Carefully. Heaven help us if we intervene like we did in Iraq.
NEWS FLASH…folks in the Middle East don’t particularily like America’s foreign policy.
Comment by Badger — December 30, 2007 @ 11:26 am
And Morocco a few years back, in which the Islamist votes were quickly squelched. Too much democracy.
The US has largely ignored Pakistan and its constant political turmoil up until we needed to pressure them into helping after 2001. Typically, our foreign policy (and I do not exempt Democratic administrations) has been to support stability even it means supporting dictators. In fact, dictators tend to be preferred because it makes dealing with them so much simpler. None of that messy democracy and populism that might interfere with bidness.
December 30th, 2007 at 11:34 am“Amazing!! I was wondering how long it would take one of you left nut libs to bring up our great President because, let’s face it, George Bush is the cause of EVERYTHING that happens in the world!!”
Buddy, are you, like, 14 years old?
If so, please leave discussion of serious matters to adults. I don’t care that you have a com-pu-ter.
If not, you have too many worries for me to bother listing.
December 30th, 2007 at 11:47 amWhen Clinton was president, not one American soldier was killed in battle. It was Bush Sr. who sent our troops to Somalia, not Clinton. If you really want peace and prosperity, the only answer is vote Democrat.
Comment by delafield — December 30, 2007 @ 11:45 am
There were certainly troop deaths in Bosnia and that was definitely on his watch. In those days, Republicans were violently opposed to sending troops overseas into a civil war and were anything but opposed to criticizing the “commander in chief” on a regular basis — both those in Congress and the “conservatives” on Faux.
December 30th, 2007 at 11:51 amBhutto tried to hire U.S. security guards
By Philip Sherwell
December 30, 2007
LONDON SUNDAY TELEGRAPH
NEW YORK — Benazir Bhutto was so fearful for her life that she tried to hire British and American security firms, including Blackwater, to protect her, but Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf refused to allow the foreign contractors to operate in Pakistan, her aides said.
December 30th, 2007 at 11:56 amhttp://washingtontimes.com/ article/ 20071230/ FOREIGN/ 542639205/ 1003
The doctors that tried to save her life and the ones who prepared her body for burial know whether Bhutto was shot or not. I will also bet that there’s more video out there of the assassination. The CNN video definitely shows a gun, and you can definitely see that it’s being fired. This begs the question. When was the last time an Islamic Extremist assassinated his intended victim before he blew himself up (along with 20+ other people)?
December 30th, 2007 at 11:56 amWASHINGTON — In the weeks before Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, the Bush administration directly provided her with intelligence on dangers she faced from militants in Pakistan, as U.S.-backed President Pervez Musharraf resisted pressure to expand the scope of her security detail, U.S. lawmakers and other officials and Bhutto supporters said Friday. -LA Times
December 30th, 2007 at 11:56 amAmazing!! I was wondering how long it would take one of you left nut libs to bring up our great President because, let’s face it, George Bush is the cause of EVERYTHING that happens in the world!!
Comment by John Kerry
He and his crime family are a pretty big contributor. If AQ really did have something to do with the assassination, think what Pakistan would be like now if Bush had actually gone after Osama and AQ rather than sitting back and allowing him a “get out of jail free” card in Pakistan.
Or, imagine if Bush had ensured that Bhutto had the protection she needed. He had to know that Musharruf wasn’t providing real protection for her. His police mysteriously disappeared shortly before she was assassinated. Don’t you find that odd? If Bush truly cared about what happened to Bhutto, he would have told Musharruf that if anything happened to Bhutto, all American aid would be cut off. That would have been a real incentive to get Musharruf to protect her since his only interest in the US is the billions we give him to fight the “terrorists”, even though a fraction of the money we give him actually goes there. The remainder is going into his and his minions pockets (sounds a lot like the Bush Crime Family). So, yes, Bush is complicit in Bhutto’s death. Too bad you don’t like it, but reality bites.
December 30th, 2007 at 12:18 pmIt ceases to amaze me those who look at nukes like they are tanks or grenades. Still better those who trust in a MAD policy (Mutually Assured Destruction), which only works if both sides are rational with open lines of communication. Furthermore overlap a well placed nuke or two in New York, LA, DC would kill hundreds of thousands of Americas, dampen or destroy parts of our economic and/or political infrastructure, severely harm our surviving mindset.
So if we respond and wipe Pakistan off the map what happens then? These weapons affect a much greater area than their target. China and India may respond. Depending on the prevailing winds that carry the fallout our counter attack may adversely impact Japan, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan or even maybe even further the USA.
Why is everything Bush’s fault or seem to be Bush’s fault? Because he is the leader of this country and for six years he has been given a free hand. This is a man who says he looked into Putin’s soul. I rest my case. It seems if we had done the opposite of what Bush wanted to do in most cases it would have been a good starting point. Dubya is a war criminal and a corrupt GOP despot. The only good thing about Bush is his dog, Barney!
Democrats can not make a difference until they step up, repeatedly. Haven’t seen this behavior yet! Only Senators Dodd, Biden, Obama showed some consistency.
Senator Clinton is just more of the same. She talks about foreign policy experience, but she was a cosponsor of the bill that allowed Bush to invade Iraq. She did it again with signing on to the resolution about Iran. So it is evident she has learned nothing in the Senate over six years concerning foreign policy. She lectures Sen. Obama about what!!!
Bush in pressing Musharif to go ahead with elections is not acting in Pakistan’s and America’s best interest. He is acting in Musharif’s best interest. One party has pledged to boycott, another lost their leader and the last election was a sham; so why have one now? If the election is just serving as a rubber stamp for Musharif, then go ahead; however, if an election is to be fair and transparent political contest with all parties committed to its out come, then delay it 4 to 6 months. However, Bush has shown he does not respect fair and transparent elections (Florida 2000 and Ohio 2004); so Bush feels and acts out ’screw the people it is what I and my base want that matters’ for over 6 years. Hence we are more divided today than in 1999.
December 30th, 2007 at 12:18 pmI have to shake my head every time I read something that refers to Pakistan as a Democracy. Pakistan IS NOT a Democracy. Since when, in a Democratic government, can you declare Marshall law and lock up all your political opponents? Even though Musharruf has rescinded his takeover of Pakistan, his political opponents are still under house arrest. Just because Pakistan holds crooked elections DOES NOT make it a Democracy.
December 30th, 2007 at 12:24 pmWASHINGTON — In the weeks before Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, the Bush administration directly provided her with intelligence on dangers she faced from militants in Pakistan, as U.S.-backed President Pervez Musharraf resisted pressure to expand the scope of her security detail, U.S. lawmakers and other officials and Bhutto supporters said Friday. -LA Times
Comment by Xisithrus
He may have provided her with intelligence but he didn’t provide her with protection. He had some power with Musharruf considering how much of our taxpayer dollars goes to Pakistan. All he had to do was to threaten to cut off the honey pot if Musharruf didn’t protect Bhutto.
December 30th, 2007 at 12:26 pmIf there is; should our response be to let those having the problem sort it out on there own or should we intervene in an attempt to help them? If you disagree with Bush’s positions, what should our position be?
Comment by CaptainMantastic
You are right. We should immediately invade and occupy Pakistan to make sure that it is a democracy. What a tool you are CM. Our position should be to condemn Musharruf for failing to protect Bhutto and to stop giving our taxpayer dollars to him. Then let Pakistan work out their own problems. If they want to be a democracy (which they are NOT now), then they will work towards that. If they don’t, well, that’s really NONE OF OUR BUSINESS!
December 30th, 2007 at 12:29 pm“It ceases to amaze me those who look at nukes like they are tanks or grenades. Still better those who trust in a MAD policy (Mutually Assured Destruction), which only works if both sides are rational with open lines of communication. Furthermore overlap a well placed nuke or two in New York, LA, DC would kill hundreds of thousands of Americas, dampen or destroy parts of our economic and/or political infrastructure, severely harm our surviving mindset.”
The Dudester
So much to unpack, but here goes: Madd has worked for decades, and at a time when Khruschev sounded every bit as “irrational” as Iran’s leaders do today (”We will bury you”). The Iranians have been willing to talk - but Bush is more interested in demonizing them. A new democratic president will not make the same mistake.
The use of suitcase nukes is still fantasy, so a missile launch (which would be identified on radar, and so give away it’s point of origin) is the only other delivery system. Since Madd dictates a massive retaliation against a single missile strike, this avenue of attack would only assure a nation’s destruction. Let me repeat: suitcase nukes are a fantasy. There is no chance of “a well placed nuke or two in New York, LA, DC,” without us being able to determine it’s point of origin, and massively retaliating against the country which launched it.
December 30th, 2007 at 1:01 pmThank you:
Osama is dead.
Its useful for Al quaeda and bush / neocons to make everybody think hes alive
how would bin landen not be able to get a small 300$ vid cam and say on video :
“I am OBL . Today is December 30th 2007, Bush is bla bla bla, Iraq is bla bla blaâ€
he could give heaps of topical information in 1 minute. Everybody would instanlty know its current and real.
OBL is now a hoax used to generate fear for republicans and fund raising for al quaeda.
Comment by overlap
Osama Bin Laden passed away six (6) years ago and is buried in the mountains of southeastern Afghanistan. Do you believe that a sickly 6′6″ man confined to a wheel chair and dragging a portable dialysis machine behind him is going up and down snow-covered mountain passes in Afghanistan or Pakistan?
Check out http://www.whatreallyhappened.com and see the fake video tapes that have that ole Made in the USA look and feel to them. Carry me back to Old Virginney… for some new tapes…
I turned off John Mclaughlin Group a couple of weeks ago when he started talking about “Osama Bin Laden said”… Even talk show host Big Ed Schultz hasn’t faced up to fact that Osama Bin Laden is dead and gone…
Ah, how Americans cling to their imperial fantasies of how the USA brings democracry to the world: of course, it’s a complete lie: we bring fascist dictators to the world: Iran 1953, Guatemala 1954. Chile under Reagan was turned from a democracy under socialist Allende to become a military dictatorship under General Pinochet…
December 30th, 2007 at 1:02 pmFor a few more details, visit my web site at http://www.bottlebrushpress.com, click on Alternative Media and scroll to towards the end to read “thumbnail sketches” about 107 (now 109) years of U. S. imperialism around the world., turning democracies into dictatorships with the help of the CIA…
Comment by delafield
Could you post a link?
I’ve heard there were rear echelon who died, but no combat-related deaths.
December 30th, 2007 at 1:20 pm.
Mission accomplished?
Musharraf has never wanted these elections… EVER!
How convenient that the opposition Party leader, who Musharraf placed under house arrest(for her safety, LOL) is no longer that threat to him. How convenient that the people are pissed off that they riot granting Musharraf the base to postpone/cancel these elections.
How convenient that the opposition Leader who so openly talks about how Osama bin Laden was killed, is herself silenced.
Now, whens OBL confession tape due out concerning the death of Bhutto…?
.
December 30th, 2007 at 5:48 pm