What Benazir Bhutto's death tells us about Radical Islamism

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by IminWonderland

I do not think she was killed for being a woman. She was killed because she wanted to take Pakistan away from a Dictatorship.

She has plenty of obvious opposition from very violent and well organized groups who have No interest in promoting Democracy in Pakistan. That is not an excuse for Musharraf's self protecting behavior or lax security if that happened? I am no fan of the leader or his government. But it is also a reality of the situation. The Al Qaeda interest is to divide and destabilize everyone involved.

[IminWonderland]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

She has plenty of obvious opposition from very violent and well organized groups who have No interest in promoting Democracy in Pakistan. That is not an excuse for Musharraf's self protecting behavior or lax security if that happened? I am no fan of the leader or his government. But it is also a reality of the situation. The Al Qaeda interest is to divide and destabilize everyone involved.

I think that in Pakistan, Musharraf and Al Qaeda ultimatley want the same thing. They both want each other in that country, as Musharraf has been sending them money and arming them for several years now. But, I do not think that Al Qaeda is who did it here.

Bhutto knew who would do it before it even happened. It wasn't just woman's intuition for this prediction.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

She has plenty of obvious opposition from very violent and well organized groups who have No interest in promoting Democracy in Pakistan. That is not an excuse for Musharraf's self protecting behavior or lax security if that happened? I am no fan of the leader or his government. But it is also a reality of the situation. The Al Qaeda interest is to divide and destabilize everyone involved.

But we're beating Al Qaeda in Iraq, there is no way they could have done anything successful somewhere else...I mean, that would mean they are just as able to have another 9/11 and our fighting in Iraq is meaningless in the war on terror

[Dylith]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

As everyone is already aware Benazir Bhutto was assassinated Dec 27, 2007 as she was at a political rally. She had returned from exile in Britain after she was allowed to run for political office again. She had already been the first woman elected Prime Minister of an Islamic nation, so she was a figuredhead of progress for all Islamic nations.

She has not been the only elected leader though, and she wasn't even the first (non-elected) female Muslim leader.

But there is still one problem. The reaction to Bhutto's campaign was still very negative, and she paid a hefty price for it.

This couldn't possibly be because she was a really poor leader in many areas could it? She was a horribly corrupt leader and deserved to be in prison. She should have been arrested as a criminal as soon as she went back to Pakistan.

This tells us that Pakistan hasn't reached the progress we hoped they had. In fact, maybe they regressed, going from electing a woman as prime minister in 1988 to killing her when she wants to run again.

She had already been elected into office twice, she wouldn't have been able to run again anyway. Musharraf and his new court wouldn't have allowed it. Not unless she made an alliance with him (which there were certainly rumors of).

The second thing that struck me is this: Bhutto was a Muslim woman, having served her country for many years as prime minister, and a great figurehead that many people were able to get behind and support. She wanted democracy and freedom in Pakistan. She wanted rights for women in Pakistan.

Too bad she didn't do anything while in office to secure these rights. She ran on a false platform. Womens rights issues weren't even looked at until after she left office. She never put forward the promised legislation to help women out and she never repealed older laws in order to give women more rights.

And pro-democracy? She supported the Taliban's rise to power and gave them financial and military aid. She helped their rise to power in Afghanistan.

No, she meddled in the affairs of her own country, something she is entitled to do.

And the Pakistani economy did not thank her for that. She was a poor economic leader.

So what does this tell me? That this is a true sign of what Muslims hate about the United States. We have for the past many years been arguing about what makes them hate us, and the controversy has been between two main talking points: they hate us for our culture of freedom or they hate us for meddling in their political and economic affairs. But I think the assassination of Bhutto is a prime example of what it is they truly hate, and that's the culture of freedom. They hate that she was a woman. They hate she stood for a free and united culture, and so they killed her.

While some certainly did hate her because she was a woman in power, you are judging people's motivations for the assassination of a politician that you obviously do not know very much about.

Couple that with the fact that we have no idea why Bhutto was actually killed and your "theory" goes up in smoke. It is premature at best.

Sure, there have been claims from the Muslim world that they hate us for meddling in their affairs,

We have, and yes they had every reason to dislike the west for some of the things that we did to them.

[7960]

What Benazir Bhutto's death tells us about Radical Islamism

Nobody's posted "religion of peace" yet?

[Dylith]

Plus, I really dislike this grouping together of "radical Islamists" that we tend to do in western media. As if they were all the same group carrying out their acts of violence for the same reasons. What a huge misconception of the Middle East such a notion paints.

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by Dylith

Plus, I really dislike this grouping together of "radical Islamists" that we tend to do in western media. As if they were all the same group carrying out their acts of violence for the same reasons. What a huge misconception of the Middle East such a notion paints.

That's because no matter what the lip service says, many in power here believe "they" need Christianity and democracy (our vision of it of course) so of course thinking like the initial post of this thread is the norm.

Its funny to say Pakistan regressed when they elected and reelected a woman to a higher office then we have here in America - and then we wonder why some there buy into the propaganda.

[avsp]

FWIW the drivers in my prefered taxi form, (all of whom are 'muslim', some are Birmingham born & bred, some Bangladeshi but most Kashmiri), were surprised that she returned coz she was bound to be killed. She had so many enemies.

They seem to favour a LIHOP view although they admit that they are guessing. They also feel that she wasnt killed specifically because she was a woman but because she was a Bhutto

Either way the rioting now is playing into the hands of all the authoritain factions as they can portray their tyranny/clampdown/whatever as the solution to the unrest

Is their any possibility that the west is going to have to rush in at the last minute & remove the nukes?

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by IminWonderland

Bhutto knew who would do it before it even happened. It wasn't just woman's intuition for this prediction.

I do agree it very possible that they let it happen. That does not mean he or his people were involved. But I doubt they are in tears over it.

As for the prediction, when you say something like that and take these kinds of public risks you have some measure of responsibility for yourself. If she did not trust the government security is she some helpless woman who has nobody to help her? The statement is not proof of anything.

[IminWonderland]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

I do agree it very possible that they let it happen. That does not mean he or his people were involved. But I doubt they are in tears over it.

As for the prediction, when you say something like that and take these kinds of public risks you have some measure of responsibility for yourself. If she did not trust the government security is she some helpless woman who has nobody to help her? The statement is not proof of anything.

It is something she predicted for a good reason. She knew the element in her country, and the element she talked about wasn't Al Qaeda. That is my point.

She no doubt took risks, and she knew she would possibley die from them. She was willing to take those risks for her cause, and although her death is a tragedy, she is heroic for standing up.

[DosEquis]

She would have probably been elected again. With that considered she would have had the majority vote. To me that would indicate that the country has not regressed, at least not regressed to a point of their society can be characterized being anti-women/anti-democracy.

What did happen though is a group of people, who at a minimum were anti-Bhutto, and at most anti-Bhutto, democracy, and anti-women having power. In a muslim country I do not find this unusual. She also put out rhetoric such as 'going after Al Qaeda'. With that it doesn't really surprise me an attempt was made on her life, and it just happened to be successful.

[lew]

Wow, I've never seen such an amazing Blame America First thread


Yeah, Bhutto was killed because Americans are free. Way to put the blame on us

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by lew

Wow, I've never seen such an amazing Blame America First thread


Yeah, Bhutto was killed because Americans are free. Way to put the blame on us

Who ever said that?!!