From rawstory.com we get some of the anomalies regarding the Bhutto assassination pointing the finger at Musharraf/Bush-Cheney as the parties responsible.
a. the crime scene was hosed down within an hour with a high pressure hose
b. Police bodyguards were withdrawn
c. No autopsy was permitted in a situation that would normally require one by law. Although the NYT story (12.29.07) highlighted Bhutto's email charging Musharraf with responsibility in case of her death, it parroted the Pakistani government line that her husband wanted no autopsy.
d. The change in the government story about how she was killed is very strange. Even if the Pakistani ISI were responsible, one would have thought that the first story about a shooting would be more credible, -- unless it's clear that as in JFK, the alleged assassin couldn't have produced the shots that killed her. According to some reports now emerging she was shot professionally from multiple angles -- as was JFK. But you'd think such minor details could be more easily covered up -- as in JFK -- than the surreal sunroof story.
Raw story also carried a separate story on fanatical right winger Josh Bolton's charges criticizing the US for arranging the return of Bhutto. The relevant quote below, pointing to the destabilization of a nuclear armed Pakistan also points to the motive for her assassination. As he says, we have a prescription for chaos. And we thought we were gonna survive Bush-Cheney's term in office.
Ronald
***
from rawstory.com
Bolton said the primary concern of the US needs to be the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. With Bhutto's death plunging the country into chaos, there is now a "very grave danger" the weapons will fall under control of radical Islamist militants within the Pakistani military.
"What we have now is a prescription for chaos," Bolton said.
***
from rawstory.com
http://rawstory.com//printstory.php?story=8711
Revealed: Pakistan hosed away scene after Bhutto attack
12/29/2007 @ 9:48 am
Filed by John Byrne
May have violated law by skipping autopsy
Despite official reports by Pakistan's interior ministry claiming that the government had intercepted congratulatory messages sent by al Qaeda surrounding the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, a motley of strange occurrences has sparked new suspicion of the government's official story.
On Friday, doctors at Rawalpindi General Hospital, where she died, said that Bhutto had been killed by shrapnel to the head from an explosion, not by two bullets that Bhutto supporters cited in the aftermath of the attack. Bhutto, 54, was killed as in the aftermath of a shooting and suicide bombing as she left a political rally in the city of Rawalpindi.
The government soon changed their story, saying she'd been killed by hitting the sunroof of her LandCruiser after she'd stood up to wave to a crowd. Doctors said there were no bullet marks on the former prime minister's body, and released a limited x-ray of what they said was her skull.
More alarming, however, to Bhutto supporters was the fact no autopsy was conducted prior to burial. The official line -- according to Pakistan's interim prime minister Mohammadmian Soomro -- was that Bhutto's husband had insisted no autopsy be performed.
But according to veteran lawyer Athar Minallah who spoke to McClatchy Newspapers Friday, "an autopsy is mandatory under Pakistan's criminal law in a case of this nature."
"It is absurd, because without autopsy it is not possible to investigate," Minallah told McClatchy's Saeed Shah and Warren Strobel in a little publicized piece. "Is the state not interested in reaching the perpetrators of this heinous crime or there was a cover-up?"
Autopsies are generally not conducted in Islam unless ordered by a court, because the religion calls for burial as quickly as possible. It's unclear whether Bhutto's circumstances would have warranted an exception.
According to the reporters, "the scene of the attack also was watered down with a high-pressure hose within an hour, washing away evidence."
Shah, who reported from the scene Thursday, wrote in a second piece that police rangers charged with protecting her "abandoned their posts" shortly before the bombing, leaving just a handful of Bhutto's own bodyguards protecting her.
"Police officers had frisked the 3,000 to 4,000 people attending Thursday's rally when they entered the park, but as the speakers from Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party droned on, the police abandoned many of their posts," Shah wrote. "As she drove out through the gate, her main protection appeared to be her own bodyguards, who wore their usual white T-shirts inscribed: 'Willing to die for Benazir.'"
Some of Bhutto's supporters were suspect of the "sunroof theory."
A "senior official" of Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party called the claim "false," saying he'd seen at least two bullet marks on her body after the attack.
"It was a targeted, planned killing," BPP's Babar Awan said. "The firing was from more than one side."
Another newspaper also asserted witnesses saw her shot.
Multiple reports said Bhutto had shown disregard for her personal safety by waving to the crowd.
"In her enthusiasm, she got carried away, and exposed herself in ways" she shouldn't have, a former State Department official told Shah.
Pakistan indicated Saturday it would delay January elections because of turmoil caused by Bhutto's death. Protests and looting have left at least 38 people dead.
Updated to include background on autopsies as regards Islam.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Researchers here are claiming evidence that 'witnesses' who saw bullet holes in Bhutto are the same 'witnesses' who saw planes fly into WTCs 1 and 2
Dell E, from Minneapolis wrote:
Many appear not to understand the storybook media reports. Where's the cynical press?
First reports said Bhutto was alive but in the hospital and "critical". This had to have been from hospital
sources.
Second report said she had been shot in the neck. This had to have come from the hospital.
Soon after, came another report saying she had been shot in the neck and chest.
No x-rays of the neck or chest were released.
Not much later, reports were that she had died.
Then they said she had crunched her head on the roof. The report was she died from a head fracture.
The video scene of her hitting her head --not from shrapnel-- clearly demonstrates the head-hitting was minor and
was unlikely to have even dazed her let alone knock her out or crush her head. Note also, those around her did
not appear to be hit by "shrapnel" or smack their heads, etc.
Video scenes. A still photo from the video showing what appears to be the gunman with a pistol. Statements that
three shots were heard.
There must have been numerous videos taken but only one or two were shown. Note the initial videos ALWAYS stopped
just frames prior to her being attacked. And there has, that I've seen, never been a slo-mo of the complete video
on TV. Moreover, I also note the videos always changed scenes going from the close up of her attack to one down
the street for the explosion.
I thought it was unpleasant to see or out of respect for the Bhutto family. Now, it could be because "they"
didn't want the world to see exactly what happened.
The nuclear stuff is and was a non issue. Someone is attempting to frighten someone for an unstated agenda.
And how just did al Qaeda get involved? The initial statements regarding this certainly seemed tentative and
lacking any credibility.
I doubt that al Qaeda has/had that much interest in the election. It would sure help the Bush cause (and deflect
the issue from the Pakistani opposition/administration.)
Note the congratulatory messages" were not produced. Note also, the Bush camp soon after repeatedly said that al
Qaeda was a culprit. (Check the time line. I heard the Pakistani administration saying al Qaeda and soon
afterwards Bush said the same. 6,7,8? hour time difference, night/day. They had been in contact, so it wouldn't
surprise me.) Nothing knew here.
I am sure I am merely overly cynical.
Maybe more recent news tells all. Maybe.
Dell
So called Anonymous has it backwards. The video on rawstory.com shows her shawl lifted by the wake of the bullets whizzing past. Do you (Anon) think all eye witnesses to airplanes flying into the buildings on 911 are Pakistani agents? If not, then who's agents are they?
Bill W left the URL to the relevant entry on his WW4 Report website:
http://ww4report.com/node/4872
Clearly you're a conspiracy kook who has given the CIA too much credit.
Since you claim to like to play chess, consider this theory.
Mushariff ?sp? wanted her out, but didn't want to get his hands dirty.
Taliban wanted Bhutto out and made public statements to that effect.
Mushariff has intelligence of a plot, pulls back letting the Taliban do his dirty work.
End result. Bhutto out, Taliban blamed.
No need for the CIA to be involved. CIA and US wanted Bhutto in power. US was pushing for a power sharing arrangement.
Does it matter how Bhutto died? Shot, or result from explosion doesn't change the fact that she's dead and there is more instability in the region.
Thanks, A. You make some good points. Interesting bathroom myth about CIA = keystone cops. Hardly. Although in this case, the ISI seem to have really mucked up the official story past redemption and the NYTimes is being forced to cover the discrepancies.
Yup, this could be a major cock up for these guys, especially over the autopsy issue.
But in the end, I suspect the whole thing will go away: it'll just trail a whole load of embarrassing garbage.
The point is that the Taliban, the ISI and the CIA are all one unit. They're all working together and they're all paid by the same people: you and me.
Ronald
JK wrote:
It might have been the ISI but without the CIA. The US had a vital interest in Bhutto succeeding as did Israel. This case SHOULD NOT preoccupy the movement since we are not likely to ever know who did it and people will be wasting time, chewing on a bone that has no meat.
Ronald responded:
Thanks, JK. The ISI, as the saying goes, doesn't pass air without approval from
their paymasters. The trick is to figure out the US interest in the assassination.
In any event, for a plan they had determined on the moment she was coming back, they really mucked it up -- to the level where even NPR has had to take notice that the
official story is open to question. And the Times as ever is covering it up like a blanket.
Post a Comment