Benazir Bhutto, the former Pakistani Prime Minister, was assassinated yesterday, December 27, 2007. She was warned before returning to Pakistan that she would be assassinated. Yet, the Bush administration pressured Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf to allow her back into Pakistan. The official Pakistani government (a dictatorship under Musharraf) is blaming al Qaeda and the Taliban for sending the suicide bomber who killed Bhutto.
This all raises questions. The U.S. has wanted to get into Pakistan. The U.S. has 26,000 troops in Afghanistan to Pakistan's immediate northwest. Bob Gates wants 7,500 more stationed there to fight the Taliban. With troops in Afghanistan, if the U.S. puts troops in Pakistan, it can surround the Taliban and al Qaeda on the Pakistani border with Afghanistan and "secure" Pakistan's nuclear weapons. Then, it can turn to fighting Iran with Israel. At least this is what it looks like on paper.
Of course, the U.S. wants to secure corridors for oil pipelines throughout the region and to control the oil fields. That's the strategic goal, or the global "prize," as Dick Cheney has termed it.
So, why does it appear that Bhutto was set up? Look at how vilifying it is. Look at how the Western corporate mass media, the Empire's mouthpieces, are decrying the assassination. Look at how it makes al Qaeda and the Taliban look to be the sort in need of being exterminated. It plays right into the hands of the propagandists and psychological-operations people doesn't it?
For some background, Pakistan has an intelligence service called the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). On 9-11, Pakistani lieutenant general Mahmoud Ahmad was the head of ISI. In late August 2001 just before the 9-11 attacks, Porter Goss and his later co-chairmen, Florida Democratic senator Bob Graham, along with Arizona Republican senator John Kyl, were in Islamabad, Pakistan, meeting with Pakistan's dictator president, Pervez Musharraf, and General Ahmad and others. On 9-11, those same members of US Congress were in Washington having breakfast with General Ahmad.
It has been reported that general Ahmad ordered a money transfer of one hundred thousand dollars to Mohamed Atta of al Qaeda who was the supposed lead terrorist in the US supervising the 9-11 attacks.
Keep in mind that Porter Goss had been ten years in the CIA dealing directly with covert operations. When it later came out that George W. Bush had been briefed by the CIA some five weeks before 9-11 that al Qaeda was planning to attack the US by commercial airline hijackings, Goss called indignation of people "a lot of nonsense" that the president knew about the attacks but those attacks were still easily pulled off while US fighter jets were far away in war games or ordered to sit on the ground (highly unusual) until it was too late.
Porter Goss was the Director of Central Intelligence (September 24, 2004–April 21, 2005) when that office was abolished. He remained on as the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
For some more Bhutto-assassination questions, here's an interesting article. "More Questions Than Answers - Updated," by Cernig. The Newshoggers. December 28, 2007.
Cernig asks the question why Musharraf pardoned Baitullah Mehsud in 2005 if Mehsud was and is al Qaeda. Musharraf is now blaming Mehsud for ordering Bhutto's assassination.
Pakistan has "intelligence intercepts" indicating that al Qaeda was behind the killing of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, the Interior Ministry said on Friday.
..."We have intelligence intercepts indicating that al Qaeda leader Baitullah Mehsud is behind her assassination," ministry spokesman Javed Iqbal Cheema told a news conference.
Are those "intelligence intercepts" on the order of the Yellowcake Forgery? Why in the world would anyone automatically believe Pakistani intelligence when it has such a long history of lying? Pakistan is a military dictatorship. Pakistan is guilty of gross misallocation of funds from the U.S. It was to spend funds fighting al Qaeda but instead beefed up security against military rival India. Even that you ought to consider taking with a large grain of salt. Isn't it more of the U.S. imperial plan for the area? Wouldn't Pervez Musharraf already be gone otherwise? Isn't he really still a puppet of the U.S. oligarchy and globalist plutocrats?
Just remember the terrible earthquakes that hit Pakistan. Remember all the freezing and starving people in the mountains. Do you think they've all been restored to better conditions than before? Then think about the billions spent on nuclear weapons, U.S. jet fighters and other weaponry, and the generals living the highlife. Who can trust people with such results?