I blame GEORGE W. BUSH for the terrorist murder of Benazir Bhutto

[BushOut06]

Bush may not have carried out the attack, and he may not have ordered it. I doubt the orders came from any American governmental agency. However, Bush certainly helped foster terrorism in Pakistan. First, with his attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan, and secondly by helping to prop up that thug dictator Musharraf. The ONLY thing that *'s so-called "Global War on Terror" has done is to INCREASE terrorism, and to fuel the determination of these groups. You bet your ass that I hold this murderous war criminal, the one who STOLE two consecutive elections in this country, responsible for this heinous act!

[SpiralHawk]

1. "Smirk." - Commander AWOL

[undeterred]

2. ..that only stirs the pot of hatred more

Lets try to bring peace, which is what she would have wanted.

[oldtime dfl_er]

4. I don't agree

I think it is Bush who stirs the pot of hatred, and the poster is absolutely right that Bush has propped up Musharef for his phony "war on terra". Only the truth can set us free.

[Xenotime]

77. Agreed. His threats to Iran and others makes the world hate the US even more.

[Cha]

31. No, it doesn't..it assigns

the blame where it should be.

[ChazII]

44. Exactly.

That would be the best way to honor this brave woman.

[bluerum]

3. He has assisted the Musharraf regime for years. He knows their interests

and ambitions. We all knew this was coming - it was just a matter of time.

May this brave honorable woman rest in peace. And may those who perpetrated this act suffer a thousand deaths.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

5. Oh well, the Freepers are just going to say we said it......

.....so we might as well say it......

[BushOut06]

39. I could care less about what Freepers think or say

And I'm not about to "moderate" my viewpoint just because of what they might think about me. They already despise us, and I'd say many of them would love to see the entire lot of us locked up in some detention camp. Who gives a rat's ass what they think?

[IsItJustMe]

56. Just wondering, do you know if the freepers have blamed Bill Clinton yet?

[mwb970]

6. bush's were errors of omission rather than commission.

It isn't that he actively caused the event, it's that he sat by passively and never did anything to prevent it. Distracted by Iraq, he allowed the situation to fester. bush and cheney both seem tone-deaf to the realities of this world.

[Supersedeas]

34. Propping up Musharraf was key too -- another Condi foreign policy success?

[Buzz Clik]

7. Seven degrees of George Bush: Let's do ... Bhutto's assassination.

We might need more than seven degrees. It's a huge stretch.

[BushOut06]

11. Criminal negligence at best

Re-read my post. I didn't say that he was actively involved. But he did help inflame the hostility in Pakistan. By standing by Musharraf and fueling the hatred of the extremists in the region, he helped create the circumstances under which Bhutto was assassinated.

[The Stranger]

13. Nothing is "a huge stretch" from the most powerful person in the world.

He wields more power, has access to more information, more intelligence, more economic and political influence -- bullshit, that this is a stretch.

[lumberjack_jeff]

25. How about two.

George Bush paid Pervez Musharraf $2 billion.
Part of that money was spent paying the government (in)security which allowed a suicide bomber armed with guns into a political rally of Musharraf's main rival.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

30. there have been multiple assassination attempts on Musharraf

so how does that fit into your little master plan there?

[lumberjack_jeff]

35. I give successful assassination attempts somewhat more weight.

It appears that the security forces are somewhat more diligent when protecting the guy who pays the bills.

I guess they call that LIHOP.

[orleans]

65. i thought it was $5 billion n/t

[lumberjack_jeff]

82. You're probably right. They cut him one check for $2b in 2004. n/t

[Efilroft Sul]

8. Let's blame the actual assassin for once.

Otherwise, we may as well blame Reagan for Indira Ghandi's assassination in 1984, the elder Bush for Rajiv Ghandi's assassination in 1991 -- and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's assassination on Jimmy Carter in 1979.

Fundamentalist crazies perform political assassinations in that part of the world in all kinds of seasons, no matter who we have as our President.

What a tragic loss.

[treestar]

27. There is a valid argument that the only superpower in the world

Disproportionately influences events, though. It is at least arguable that many of these incidents might not have taken place. The US is always seeking to influence the politics of other countries and if it left them alone, it is possible that the infighting would not be as severe. So I can kind of get where the OP comes from. True there would still be assassinations in other countries, some by lone nuts and some for internal reasons, but with the sole superpower being the way it is, there is also the possibility of the superpower's interference or influence contributing to the problem. As US citizens we have some responsibility.

[Efilroft Sul]

41. Islamic militants hated the USA long before Bush 43 came along.

One could make an argument the Islamic world has a valid grudge against us going back to the Eisenhower administration, when the CIA toppled the elected government of Iran in favor of the Shah. But that's beside the point.

The point is, Islamic militants didn't like us when the world was divided up between two superpowers during the Cold War. And they won't like us in a multipolar world with the USA, EU, China, Russia, and India shaping world events, either. They just won't like America -- period -- no matter how benevolent our nation is.

For better or for worse, America is always going to have a major influence upon world events. With the assassination of Bhutto, now is not the time for liberals and Democrats to try and outsprint each other in the Blame America First Race. Bhutto's assassination is the responsibility of Islamic militants and Islamic militants alone, and they would've killed Bhutto or any other such political figure whether Bush, Gore, or Kerry was in the Oval Office.

[treestar]

48. They don't like us because of our interference

And our acting like they should live according to our interests.

Arguably if the US just minded it own business from the time of the Eisenhower Administration, the Islamic Revolutions wouldn't have happened. Most of the countries were getting more and more modern and liberal, within Islamic tradition. The Islamic backlash could be due in great part to the attempt to resist the U.S., etc., interfering.

Your last paragraph is right from the Republican playbook. The idea "they hate us" is, too.

[IsItJustMe]

59. I see you saw through the poster's bull shit. You are right, straight out of the Repuke handbook.

[Efilroft Sul]

75. Thank goodness you aren't in charge of foreign affairs or national security.

[Efilroft Sul]

74. Pakistan getting a grip on itself is in our national interest.

Whether Pakistan is rooting out al Qaeda on its frontier with Afghanistan, or securing its nuclear arsenal, or restoring democracy, what Pakistan should be doing is in our interest. And not just American interests, but its neighbors' national interests as well.

The problems with Pakistan could very well exist past the Bush administration. What are you going to do if a Democrat is elected President in 2008? He or she is going to have to handle these matters realistically, and he or she is going to have the same national interests with Pakistan that I cited above. Just because the President won't be Bush isn't going to make our foreign policy magically righteous, and he or she isn't going to cause Islamic militants lay down their arms after an oath of office is taken.

Look beyond Bush. My concerns about Pakistan aren't about political grandstanding but national security.

[Didereaux]

9. Cheney! goddamit Cheney! not the chimp, the pet. the OWNER the real President!

[Marrah_G]

10. Not everything can be blamed on * --- This woman had MANY enemies

I hold whomever killed her responsible.

[DangerDave921]

26. Reasoned debate

There are those on here who engage in spirited debate and there are those who just hate Georgie so much that they want to lay all the world's ills at his feet. Let's hold Georgie accountable for all the things he IS accountable for, without reaching to find ones. That just dilutes any valid criticism.

Terrible loss today.

[flordehinojos]

12. poppy's undercover CIA hands well trained in undercover attacks ...

never there, never him, always dirty, dirty hands ready to .... uphold and defend bush supremacy, carlysle group, and halliburton oil anywhere, anytime in the world ... think POPPY BUSH!

[in_cog_ni_to]

15. Bhutto campaigned on getting rid of the Al Qaeda groups along the Afghanistan/Pakistan border. I see

this as playing right into the Cheney/Poppy Bush agenda. This keeps their "war on terror" ALIVE to fight for years to come. More money for the military. More propaganda for the repuke candidates (I've heard THAT already from Mr/ 911 himself...Giuliani). More money for Halliburton. More money in the pockets of the warmongers.

If the warmongering thugs in the WH wanted AlQaeda off the Pakistan/Afghanistan border, they would have been gone YEARS ago. We have to remember....the psycho-in-chief and Musharref are good buddies. Bhutto's assassination only works in the warmonger's favor. I somehow doubt the warmonger's hands are completely clean in this.

[orleans]

66. my god--i just knew i couldn't be the only one thinking this way!

it sounds great for bush to say he supported bhutto, but if she had won he had a lot to lose. (war on terror bullshit)

also--what *if* she had gone after bin laden? caught him? damn! bushie's saudi friends would be really pissed wouldn't they?

yes, a ton of things went through my head today about this--and as olbermann (or someone on his show) pointed out--these "extremists" don't usually have a gun, shoot the victim & then blow themselves up. at least not traditionally.

[flordehinojos]

67. and why did bush's eye-blinking rate go wild during his "brief statement" before the television

cameras as he said, ,

"murderous extremists ...", "those who committed this crime must be brought to justice" ... "she refused to allow assassins to dictatate the course of her country ..." "...forces of terror and extremism".

I believe that if the eye blinking rate of a lying ovaloffice squatter might be taken as a measure of truth or lack thereof, one might think that bush knew who killed benazir bhutto, and that in calling for the assassins to come to justice, he knew that he was signing his own sentence to be brought to justice!

WHAT DID BUSH KNOW AND WHEN DID HE KNOW IT?

[Efilroft Sul]

16. What's the benefit in further destabilizing a Muslim country with nukes?

There's no great amount of oil in Pakistan, so that takes out the "usual" Halliburton motive.

Musharraf's government could topple in the wake of Bhutto's assassination, so that cancels any benefit of the Carlysle Group selling weapons there, especially if the crazies take over and get their hands on the nukes.

People, the loss of Benazir Bhutto is to nobody's benefit except to the group that pulled it off (bigger street cred in the short term, global threat in the long term). The situation in Pakistan isn't a parlor game. Nor is it a bid for greater Bush supremacy. Pakistan today suffered an attack of real terrorism with potentially far-reaching implications that can very quickly get beyond anyone's control. Bhutto's assassination is a pressing matter for the entire world (especially Pakistan's neighbors), and nobody in his or her right mind wants to see a nuclear Pakistan fall to pieces.

Let us call the enemy, Bhutto's assassins, by their real name: Islamic militants.

[readmoreoften]

33. Could be Islamic Militants. Could be Disaster Capitalists. We don't really know.

Islamic Militants have a history of assassinating secular enemies. Disaster Capitalists have a history of assassinating left-socialist enemies. Neither group wants peace and order, both need chaos to push through their funadmentalist agendas regardless of material agendas (oil, etc.) Neither group is concerned about regional stability either.

We probably won't know all the factors of what's happening and who is manipulating what until the dust settles. We may never know.

[Efilroft Sul]

38. There's chaos, and then there's chaos.

A nuclear-armed Pakistan destabilized by Islamic militants could be more for the Disaster Capitalists (as you say) to chew than they can bite off.

Bhutto's assassination was the work of Islamic militants. They are the primary beneficiaries of this terrorist act. Disaster Capitalists aren't even close to being secondary beneficiaries.

[IsItJustMe]

60. Are you saying that since it doesn't seem rational, the chimp can't be involded. Have you already

forgotten that we went to war with a country for having wmd, when there was none. You keep carrying the water.

[Efilroft Sul]

73. And you keep drinking the Kool-Aid.

Bhutto was taken down by Islamic militants within her own country who regularly employ assassination as a tool. Her enemies were legion. In contrast here, she was somebody whom the Bush administration and the one to follow saw and would see as a good business partner for the United States and its interests.

Want an oil pipeline across Pakistan? Energy companies preferred Bhutto, who would have rooted out the extremists and kept a pipeline safe.

Want to keep Pakistani nukes in the hands of someone rational? Security experts here were optimistic about Bhutto.

Want someone with superstar status to bring democracy back to an Islamic nation? Believe it or not, our government was pulling for Bhutto.

This time, the tin-foil hat brigade has it all wrong. Pakistan and Iraq are two different matters.

[Freddie Stubbs]

14. "attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan?"

You believe that we should have just played nice with the Taliban while they harbored bin Laden after 9/11? Even Dennis Kucinich voted to authorize the use of force against the Taliban, and he is about the biggest peacenik there is.

[Guaranteed]

17. That idiocy has gotten more popular around here- slowly- over the years. nt

[BushOut06]

18. What good has it done?

Compare the approach * took with Afghanistan to the approach Clinton took with Libya. In the former case, we've lost hundreds of American lives, and over six years later we STILL haven't captured the two primary targets we went in after. In the latter case, we used diplomatic and economic pressure, and Libya eventually cooperated with us and handed over the suspects we were after.

By going into Afghanistan, and then diverting attention to Iraq and not finishing the job, * has only served to make things much WORSE in the region.

[Kingofalldems]

37. Peacenik

A term used by RW repubs to disparage any Democrat who opposes them.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

19. I actually blame the person who killed her..

[Bluebear]

22. Not a "big picture" kind of guy, eh?

:hi:

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

23. The primary blame for any act lies in he who commited it

I dont blame Bill clinton for the attacks of Christians in Kosovo..

[IsItJustMe]

61. I would like to know who ordered it and why. The person who did it is just carrying out orders.

[AlCzervik]

20. Pakistan had major issues and upheaval before Bush.

[BushOut06]

21. And instead of trying to smooth things over, Bush actually intensifies their hatred

n/t

[progressoid]

24. I blame Barbara.

[vssmith]

28. I heard Bush call it a cowardly act

Yea! right. Like he would have enough courage to blow himself up.

Maybe call it an evil act but certainly not cowardly.

[flordehinojos]

68. did his eyes blink like hell when he said, "cowardly act" ...i think his blinking eyes denounced him

in whatever ways or however he and his poppy's trained undercover cia hands may be involved in bhutto's assassination.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

29. sorry but this is BS

this has NOTHING to do with Bush. NOTHING.

[BushOut06]

32. Nothing whatsoever?

So you're saying that Bush hasn't been trying to prop up the dictator Musharraf? Or that his "war on terror" hasn't served to increase terrorism?

[0007]

40. Egads!!! Do you live under a rock or something?

[Scriptor Ignotus]

43. newsflash to DU

crazy religious people with guns live all over the world. Some of these crazy people have hated America for decades. Some hate women for various reasons. Some hate our Westernized culture (our freedoms?).

you're going to blame Bush for this assassination? then blame Judas Priest for those boys committing suicide so many years ago. blame video games for all the recent school shootings. hell, nobody is responsible for their own actions anymore, how about I go get piss drunk, run my car over an old lady and then blame Bud Light for getting me so drunk? can't we blame the a-hole that pulled the fucking trigger? can we not do that anymore???

what a crock of bull. This woman would have been assassinated under President Al Gore just as she would have been shot under a President John Kerry.

The world may indeed be a more dangerous place because of Bush, but he is not necessarily responsible for every heinous crime that occurs on this planet.

[earth mom]

53. Wow that's the propaganda * & Faux news want you to believe: That they ALL hate us over "there".

Newsflash for ya: That propaganda faux news is feeding you is A TOTAL CROCK OF BULLSHIT.

What the people in the middle east hate is what our government is doing and has done for years and years and years all over the world.

Sorry, but the people over "there" do NOT hate the good people of this country and they do NOT hate our freedom.

They just want to be left the fuck alone and live their lives as they choose. FREELY.

But our government and the powers that be won't allow it because there is too much money to be made off the natural resources in the middle east.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

78. some do, some don't

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb

read about this guy and tell me how you're right and I'm wrong.

[BushOut06]

72. Wow - they really do hate us for our freedom?

What a crock of BULLSHIT, I reject that premise completely. Do you also believe that there is a worldwide Islamo-facist movement, intent on overthrowing the United States, and installing Islamic sharia law?

[Scriptor Ignotus]

79. not take us over

but certainly to destroy our dominance. this is undeniable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb

[BushOut06]

83. Your link is to Wikipedia - see the special note towards the top of the page?

"The neutrality of this article is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.(December 2007)
Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sayyid_Qutb

The link points out a few inconsistencies with that Wiki entry.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

84. well we should take everything from wikipedia

with a grain of salt, but there are excerpts from Qutb's own hand in that entry.

anyway how about these sources instead?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1253796
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,584478,00.html

Bush and Co. have exaggerated the power of these types of individuals, but it is a fallacy to say they don't exist at all. They are out there and they are indeed, quite dangerous.

[BushOut06]

85. I don't doubt there are a few extremists who would like to see Islamic law worldwide

Just like there are more than a few Christian types (Dominionists) who would love to see a strict Christian-based legal system instituted. But I don't think there is a concerted, well-organized, world-wide effort to bring down the United States and institute a Islamic caliphate.

[Bluebear]

42. 'NOTHING! NOTHING!' Hoo boy . . . .

[seemslikeadream]

46. Nothing to do with bush?

are you kidding me?

You have heard of A Q Khan?

[IsItJustMe]

62. How do you know?

[Scriptor Ignotus]

81. you're right

Bush masterminded the whole thing. That evil genius George W Bush really is a shifty bastard.

[Eurobabe]

36. And the puppets remain...

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

45. This Is Really Really Stupid, No Offense. n/t

[earth mom]

51. No it's not. This is exactly what * & Co want. And your post does offend. nt.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

55. No, Really, It Really Really Is.

It's just plain dumb, in fact.

When totally unrelated shit like this gets blamed on *, it always comes off as really stupid. There's enough REAL shit to blame him for. Having to play 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon as it relates to bush, with every damn thing that happens, is just really quite silly.

[Rex]

57. Nice to see you back

and well in form. :)

[earth mom]

63. Not related? Where'd you hear that? On Faux News?

:eyes:

BTW-Tigers don't change their stripes. But you know that.

[BushOut06]

70. How nice of you to skip over everything I've said and wash it all away

Notice I did NOT say that Bush was directly involved.

However, I DID say that Bush has helped to lay the groundwork for what happened. Sure, there's always been a degree of unrest in the region. But Bush, through his actions and policies - especially standing by Musharraf over the past few months - has only helped make things much worse in the region.

[Divine Discontent]

47. my sibling pointed out...

why weren't we providing some protection for her??? We know Musharraf had declared martial law recently, and many think he's not very Democratic in nature, so why wouldn't we provide some anti-terrorism protection force for her? Just saying.

[Disturbed]

49. Why wasn't she wearing a Dragonskin Vest?

She could have afforded one.

[Divine Discontent]

64. another good point... n/t

[dysfunctional press]

whatever...

:eyes:

[earth mom]

50. People need to figure out who the REAL TERRORISTS are. After that, it all falls into place. nt

[seemslikeadream]

52. Americans dismally uninformed about deceit duplicity ulterior motives behind America's manipulation

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2541216

[focusfan]

54. Bush is probably half nazi

it wouldn't suprise me if he wasn't kin to Hitler

[roamer65]

58. Imagine if we actually went after Al-Qaeda instead of invading Iraq.

If we had dealt with Osama Bin Forgotten and Al-Zawahiri, instead of ignoring them, we may not have seen the events of today. The incompetence of * is nothing less than amazing.

[BushOut06]

71. Exactly

While I may personally think that we should have handled the Taliban differently (we didn't invade Libya for refusing to hand over the suspects in the PanAm bombing), we should have at least done the job right.

[MonkeyFunk]

69. Yes

Pakistan was all peace and rainbows before Bush became President. :eyes:

[SIMPLYB1980]

76. K&R

[slackmaster]

80. K&R for the entertainment value

:rofl: