By Manila Ryce
Published Friday, December 28th, 2007, 6:17 am
Filed under: World: Asia, Videos: News, Terrorism, World Issues, Society/Culture, Videos

11 Responses to “Bhutto Said Osama Bin Laden Was Murdered”

1. 

   Interesting. Who knows. I am not surprised but sickened that now Pakistan blames Bhutto’s death on Al Queda. Yes. Right. Cuz Dick Cheney said so.

   The reality is that we may never ever know what the truth of any of this is. This we do know- this is a very major piece of shit hitting a huge industrial size/strength fan.

   Not good.

   Thanks for the provocative post… as usual.

   FranIam
   12/28/07 at 9:28 am
   

2. Benazir did not make a mistake. She mentioned Bin Laden twice on the video, as being murdered. Benazir was very articulate in her speech. So she left us with a message knowing that her life was soon to end.She was encouraged to return, and walked into a trap, led and supported by whom?

   Faye
   12/28/07 at 1:39 pm
   

3. This seems unlikely to me. If bin Laden were dead, it’s doubtless that the news would be all over the US Headlines, with a huge propaganda campaign unleashed by the Republican party about how the Democrats wanted to give up, and how the Republicans (neo-cons specifically) are the superior warriors against terrorism, regardless of whether the US could actually claim responsibility of his death. That this would escape all US intelligence services, let alone the intelligence services of all the other countries in the world seems odd. Surely if bin Laden were actually dead, the news would reverberate throughout the Muslim world. The “useful demon” argument–the idea that they’d pretend he was still alive to maintain the propaganda–seems to fall flat with me too, since the US Govt. and its media cohorts have never had a problem coming up with new demons to replace the old ones. The fact that Bhutto can no longer answer for herself seems to be the only reason this theory holds any water at all.

   I’d wait for further evidence before making up my mind. Like they say, the theory with the least assumptions is probably correct. I think it’s safe to assume she misspoke until we see further evidence.

   Sam
   12/28/07 at 1:54 pm
   
4. 

   The administration or any US intelligence agency will never inform us that Bin Laden is dead. They would do everything to keep that info from coming from an established news source.

   You can’t kill the greatest piece of propaganda ever assembled (who is funding your fake war machine and which is the only slightly functioning piece of a fake economy.)

   “Bin Laden” will “die” when the world’s currency is running off the Euro and China has all of the US’s debt. Then the war will be against something or someone else. What’s after our War on Terror you might ask? Any ideas? How about a war on Central Asia. It’s about time something happened over there. “Uzbeki assholes.”

   SirJouge
   12/28/07 at 2:18 pm
   

5. @ SirJouge

   What about every other country in the world that has an intelligence service? What about every other news service in the world? What about every other government in the world? Although I’m sure they’d love it if they could, US elite interest don’t have complete control of the world. This is news that would have come out, one way or another. Secrets are very difficult to keep.

   On top of that, like I explained, the “keep the demon to maintain the propaganda” explanation just seems like too much work when US propagandists can easily create another demon. The death of bin Laden doesn’t necessarily equate to the death al Qaeda, “Islamo-facism,” or the war on terror. Bush has already said he’s just one man and that he doesn’t think about him much, which seems to indicate to me that they’re more than willing to marginalize bin Laden if that’s what it takes to maintain the war on terror narrative.

   It seems much more plausible to me that Washington would use the death of bin Laden to bolster their war efforts, citing it as a success (I can even imagine what Bill Kristol might say). Trying to keep his death under wraps would be extremely difficult, and for the reasons I’d outlined above, extremely unlikely.

   Sam
   12/28/07 at 3:21 pm
   

6. Bhutto replied in an interview with CNN just days ago that she didn’t know if Musharaff knew where bin Laden was. If he were dead, why would she respond like that?

   rickdog
   12/28/07 at 6:19 pm
   

7. I would think that she meant Daniel Pearl, rather than Osama Bin Laden. A slip of the tongue I would think. This would be quite a bombshell to drop in such an off the cuff manner.

   John Geraghty
   12/28/07 at 7:33 pm
   

8. I want to believe Bin Laden is dead. In my gut, I doubt it.

   Comrade Kevin
   12/29/07 at 6:24 pm
   

9. rickdog said: “Bhutto replied in an interview with CNN just days ago that she didn’t know if Musharaff knew where bin Laden was. If he were dead, why would she respond like that?”

   Because it was a “reply” to a “question” from the US “media”

   anon
   01/3/08 at 12:43 am
   

10. Come on!! a seasoned, elequent politican as miss bhutto was, says that bin laden is dead,in fact murdered and names the murderer, she does not correct herself in any way. Sir David Frost, reputedly one of the most astute interrogators of politicians in the world, does not question her about this revelation and his non reaction was the reaction of someone who knew the truth of what was being said before it was said. It is either this or both are and were extremely incompetent.

    Roy Bradley
    01/4/08 at 11:03 am
    

11. “What about every other country in the world that has an intelligence service? What about every other news service in the world? What about every other government in the world? Although I’m sure they’d love it if they could, US elite interest don’t have complete control of the world. This is news that would have come out, one way or another. Secrets are very difficult to keep.”

    The Us government isn’t working alone. Business men know that International relations are very important. The US scum that commands the army isn’t working without the help of other dirty officials and wealthy elite from all over the world that all want the same outcomes from this debacle. The US and the rest of those “governments” that would divulge this information if it were true are hiding it to their own benefit as well.

    So far only Blogs cover this story.

    Why?

    Because there is less journalistic credit in blogging. And the US isn’t afraid of bloggers. The US unfortunately for the majority of them, just get their “real news” from CNN and ABC and CBS and NBC. If you’ve got a three-letter news station, chances are you’re the only reliable source, right? The consumer America isn’t going to be on the side of truth here.

    And while Aljezeera has their own problems as to whether or not they are reliable as well, I don’t think a PRIME MINISTER would slip like that. Prime Ministers tend to know the nature of things in their region. I have no doubt in my mind that she was telling the truth and it was the cause for her assassination.

    Jacklyn
    01/5/08 at 3:44 pm
    

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Tired of filing this information out everytime you leave a comment at the Largest Minority? Why not register as a user? You also get full access to our forum!

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>