Michelle Malkin » Benazir Bhutto assassinated

Benazir Bhutto assassinated

By Michelle Malkin • December 27, 2007 08:43 AM

Update Dec. 28, 10:30am. Bhutto buried.

Update 3:20pm. Photos of Bhutto’s coffin leaving a Rawalpindi hospital.

Update 2:30pm. Tough talk and a reality check from Andy McCarthy…

A recent CNN poll showed that 46 percent of Pakistanis approve of Osama bin Laden. Aspirants to the American presidency should hope to score so highly in the United States. In Pakistan, though, the al-Qaeda emir easily beat out that country’s current president, Pervez Musharraf, who polled at 38 percent.

President George Bush, the face of a campaign to bring democracy — or, at least, some form of sharia-lite that might pass for democracy — to the Islamic world, registered nine percent. Nine!

If you want to know what to make of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto’s murder today in Pakistan, ponder that.

There is the Pakistan of our fantasy. The burgeoning democracy in whose vanguard are judges and lawyers and human rights activists using the “rule of law” as a cudgel to bring down a military junta. In the fantasy, Bhutto, an attractive, American-educated socialist whose prominent family made common cause with Soviets and whose tenures were rife with corruption, was somehow the second coming of James Madison.

Then there is the real Pakistan: an enemy of the United States and the West.

Update: Video – President Bush condemns the murder.

Rather than blather about bringing the killers to “justice,” Wretchard at the Belmont Club asks what died with Bhutto:

Political murder kills not only the candidates, but the process to which they belong. Pakistani politics might not miss Benazir Bhutto as an individual, but it will surely want for the elections in general.

Elections have rarely been able in and of themselves to bring about stable democratic rule. Normally things are the other way round. It is the existence of the elements of democracy that have brought elections into existence. Whether those elements now exist in Pakistan is the question…The next few days will show whether the Pakistani Army — for it will surely not be the Taliban — can rededicate itself to electoral democracy. Pakistan needs its George Washington. Unfortunately it only has its Pervez Musharraf.

Update 10:48am: Naturally, the tinfoil hatters on the Left are out in full force.

Update 10:15am: The US presidential candidates are all angling to look presidential in the aftermath of the assassination. Mitt Romney gave a brief statement televised on Fox, condemning “global, violent, radical jihadism.” Huckabee and McCain have issued statements. So has Giuliani: “The assassination of Benazir Bhutto is a tragic event for Pakistan and for democracy in Pakistan,” he said in a statement. “Her murderers must be brought to justice and Pakistan must continue the path back to democracy and the rule of law. Her death is a reminder that terrorism anywhere — whether in New York, London, Tel-Aviv, or Rawalpindi — is an enemy of freedom. We must redouble our efforts to win the terrorists’ war on us.”

President Bush is scheduled to make a statement sometime in the hour.

Update: DAWN has constant updates. Police have fired tear gas on protesters in Peshawar.

Update: One report says al Qaeda is claiming credit…

A spokesperson for the al-Qaeda terrorist network has claimed responsibility for the death on Thursday of former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto.

“We terminated the most precious American asset which vowed to defeat [the] mujahadeen,” Al-Qaeda’s commander and main spokesperson Mustafa Abu Al-Yazid told Adnkronos International (AKI) in a phone call from an unknown location, speaking in faltering English. Al-Yazid is the main al-Qaeda commander in Afghanistan.

It is believed that the decision to kill Bhutto, who is the leader of the opposition Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), was made by al-Qaeda No. 2, the Egyptian doctor, Ayman al-Zawahiri in October.

Death squads were allegedly constituted for the mission and ultimately one cell comprising a defunct Lashkar-i-Jhangvi’s Punjabi volunteer succeeded in killing Bhutto.

Update: Allah points to graphic photos and video of the assassination scene, including this one taken just seconds before she was shot as she stands in an open vehicle campaigning. More here.

And here’s a rundown from October of some of Bhutto’s enemies:

• Taliban fighters and other Islamic extremists who resent a woman who wants to keep religion out of government and who supports the U.S. war on terror. Bhutto inflamed the militants recently when she said she might allow U.S. forces onto Pakistani soil to hunt Taliban and al-Qaeda forces hiding along the rugged Afghan-Pakistani border. The Taliban threatened to greet her with suicide bombers — but denied responsibility for the bloodshed in Karachi.

• Militant supporters of her estranged brother Murtaza, who was gunned down by police in 1996 during Benazir’s second term as prime minister. Murtaza had emerged as a key critic of her regime and head of an armed left-wing Peoples Party splinter group. “He had die-hard supporters who blame her for his death,” Sehgal says.

• Members of the military establishment who undermined her two governments and who three decades ago overthrew and executed her father, the charismatic Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

« Older Comments

#201

On December 28th, 2007 at 2:08 am, puhiawa said:

Muslims hate pigs because they want the sty for themselves. Let them have it. Just make them wallow over there.
#202

On December 28th, 2007 at 2:38 am, graysonret said:

This assassination demonstrates how volatile the world really is. My concern is what will happen in wake of such a tragedy. My other concern is that we have Presidental candidates debating daily over domestic issues and addressing the question, “What can the gov’t do for me?”, constantly, while we have serious problems in the world that will affect us more than lead in toys and “tax the rich” programs. This tragedy underlines the question, “Candidate, what are your plans for dealing with these global problems?”
#203

On December 28th, 2007 at 3:03 am, RetFireman said:

This is a Bush wet dream. Musf can implement martial law again and suspend elections.Cuz they have lots of nukes that will now remain secured.The threat of the Taliban and Al Queda in the North will not be an issue.

On the other hand, we can bomb Iran that has no stock pile.

Where is the greater threat?

Are you so blinded and myopic with your hatred for Bush and your stupidity towards what is going on in the world and in the Islamic Global grab for World Domination as to think that this has ANYTHING what-so-ever to do with Bush, Iran or whatever is going on in your paranoid tiny little brain?

Do you really think this is some conspiritorial plot in order for Bish and Cheney to finally be able to bomb Iran, because after all, for the last 30 years or so, we haven’t had any good reasons to bomb them farther into the stone age than they already live to begin with? Are you so paranoid and filled with unreasonable hatred towards a human being that you have never met, the President of the United States, that you actually think he is happy over the events of today, that has made his work in the War Against Global Terrorism and Islamic Aggression that much more difficult in that it has placed DOZENS of nuclear warheads within finger length of Al Qaeda agents working within the Pakistani Government? And just what and where do you think those war heads will go, laughing boy? DO you think they will become mere tokens and used for idol threats as the Soviets and Chinese and other Nuclear Super powers did for 50 years during the Cold War?

No F-Tard. The Islamic Jihadists goal is to bring about the new Caliphate. To do so, they must destroy the world and “cleanse it in fire”. Well gee gosh, I wonder how one cleanses the entire freaking world in fire these days? Could it be a rogue Islamic nation with about 22 nuclear tiped missles? I dunno…COULD BE?!?!?! Yeah, that must be Bush’s wet dream then, huh? the whole world going to crap. Millions and millions dying instantly, vaporized by religious fanatics, hoping to bring about the end of the world. And hey, they have even gone on record as saying as much, but then, if you actually STUDIED YOUR HISTORY AND YOUR ENEMY INSTEAD OF LISTENING TO YOUR LIBERAL JOKERS ON KOS YOU WOULD KNOW THAT! Ahchmadinijad has threatened more than once to wipe israel off the map and destroy it with fire and that he has sworn to be the one to bring about the new Caliphate before he leaves office is not a secret. that the Muslim Brotherhood was formed at the beginning of the 20th Century to bring about the New Caliphate is also nothing new. however, I bet dollars to doughnuts that you, and the rest of the sycophants on the Left know NOTHING about such things and THAT is why such idiotic statements such as yours are repeatedly made during times such as this.

This was a hit done by Al Qaeda BECAUSE SHE WOULD HAVE HAD THE US GO IN AND ERRADICATE THEM> PERIOD. Bush’s “wwet dream” was gone the minute she was slaughtered by these animals, because he has been waiting to go into Pakistan to kill these pigs for 6 years, but you Libs…and if you say you aren’t a lib after that statement, you are a liar, wouldn’t allow him to now even if he had a golden ticket. You wouldn’t give him the manpower or the money. Hell, you won’t fund the war now. It’s just a bumper sticker, right?

Geezus.
#205

On December 28th, 2007 at 5:40 am, Mr_Conservative_Cat said:

This is a Bush wet dream.

The angry salivation that drips vindictively from this remark and the absurd postulations that follow tell us much more about the widespread spoiled, emotional sickness of hate that has infected a large segmnent of our population than anything about global politics. The gross inmappropriateness of this remark at this particular time is staggering.

This kind of malicious, obsessive hatred will do us in more surely than any theoretical nuclear confrontation. So those of you who “don’t want to get involved” with ranters of this particular persuation had better start speaking up to embarrass and humiliate the fun out of such malicious activity, unless you want them to become the world. Find a way to enjoy it, because it needs to be done.
#206

On December 28th, 2007 at 6:07 am, jamesgreenidge said:

Bush Hate Is A Penny A Dozen. What’s Needed Is Real World Gutsy Solutions In A Rough World

It’s funny. The very ones who loathe Bush so and hate seeing anyone getting even scratched fighting an enemy out to corner our energy sources are the same ones more happy about seeing that Bambi’s romping atop frozen oil fields untouched by oil wells that can help keep people from having to get hurt protecting our vital energy sources.

James Greenidge
Queens NY
#208

On December 28th, 2007 at 9:21 am, granite said:

#153 On December 27th, 2007 at 11:59 pm, RetFireman said:

#160 On December 28th, 2007 at 3:03 am, RetFireman said:

You beat me to it.
Great psots.

Before I read tyhem I had been thinking this morning about the grave danger and impediment to our sfaety that our American leftists and socialists pose; and the saying,

“Lead, follow, or get out of the way.” ran through my mind.

“…there will be no tollerance for the tollerant at that point, and the stupid will need to show their colors and get the hell out of the way, …”

Exactly.

No more need be said.
#209

On December 28th, 2007 at 9:22 am, granite said:

…great posts, rather.

Man, I miss “preview” at work.
#210

On December 28th, 2007 at 9:23 am, granite said:

Yeah, I know…”them”.
#211

On December 28th, 2007 at 9:40 am, jungatheart said:

Well, they’ve done it. One of Obama’s foreign policy people has said Bhutto was killed as a result of increased terrorist activity which is a direct result of the Iraq war. It’s Bush’s fault.
#212

On December 28th, 2007 at 10:10 am, granite said:

#166 On December 28th, 2007 at 9:40 am, jungatheart said:

“Well, they’ve done it. One of Obama’s foreign policy people has said Bhutto was killed as a result of increased terrorist activity which is a direct result of the Iraq war. It’s Bush’s fault.”

What clowns.

Of course, the bully is gonna get po’d when you fight back.
#213

On December 28th, 2007 at 10:12 am, Laree said:

Pakistan is a “Sanctuary” for Taliban and Alqaeda, Six years after 9-11. Musharraf calls many Taliban – Pashtun, he doesn’t see the conflict with Terrorist, through Western Eyes. The status qou keeps Musharraf in Power. I repeat if Musharraf died tomorrow of natural causes or an accident, who would take his place? Humans beings -being mortal. No one is indespensible. I have to believe that our Govt has a contingency plan for changes in Pakistan’s leadership. Bhutto was plan A, to deal with the tribal areas of Pakistan, Why, because Musharraf benefits from the status quo. Rusty had one thing right we should suspend Aid -$$$ to that Country.
#214

On December 28th, 2007 at 10:13 am, backwoods conservative said:

On December 28th, 2007 at 9:40 am, jungatheart said:

Well, they’ve done it. One of Obama’s foreign policy people has said Bhutto was killed as a result of increased terrorist activity which is a direct result of the Iraq war. It’s Bush’s fault.

Of course. The terrorists attacked the US in 2001 because Bush invaded Iraq in 2003. Didn’t you know?

/sarc off
#215

On December 28th, 2007 at 10:15 am, Laree said:

Monica Crowley,

One assassination Three beneficiarys

http://monicamemo.typepad.com/weblog/2007/12/one-assassinati.html
#216

On December 28th, 2007 at 10:25 am, RaisedRight said:

I just wanted to share this bit of fun from a commenter at HuffPo:

Bobby (See profile | I’m a fan of Bobby)
Bhutto had flaws just like JFK, MLK and RFK. But she was the best hope for peace and democracy in Pakistan, just like those men in America. Meanwhile, did you see Dumbya’s press conference yesterday morning in Crawford. Bu$h didn’t look so hot. Perhaps a WILD night of partying? Who wouldn’t party if you are a “man” like Bu$h. This event will mean more war and war profiteering. Did you see St. Rudy just eat this tragic assassination up to help fire up his neocon legion? Dumbya and Darth Cheney want to be in the Middle East a LONG, LONG time. Even after they are out of office, so they can reap their riches from their war profiteering friends. That’s why the U.S. is building the SUPER bases in Iraq to help protect the oil. The oil that will become about 75% American (like Exxon and Chevron), thanks to an agreement with Dumbya’s puppets in the Iraq “government”. That’s why Dumbya tried to lie his way into another conflict with Iran. This event will help him “scare the shit” out of people again. Nver mind that Osama Bin Laden resides somewhere in Pakistan. Dumbya very rarely even mentions his name anymore. I guess there are too many connections with the Bin Ladens to the Bu$h family. Like the Bin Ladens being investors in the Carlyle Group. Or the Bin Ladens investing in Arbusto, which was Dumbya’s failed oil business in Texas. Or Ronny and Poppy arming Osama to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. Dumbya…what a tangled web you weave. But most of us have you figured out. Not the 25%-30%ers though.

Reply | posted 09:41 am on 12/28/2007
#217

On December 28th, 2007 at 10:29 am, Mr_Conservative_Cat said:

Well, they’ve done it. One of Obama’s foreign policy people has said Bhutto was killed as a result of increased terrorist activity which is a direct result of the Iraq war. It’s Bush’s fault.

If this was actually said, then this should be repeated LOUDLY everywhere in objection to such an unbelieveable outrage.

At the very least, it shows Obama (who is certain to distance himself from the remarks like a coward – when you gonna debate on Fox Mr Couragious President?) has not a clue, if he said this honestly, because terrorist activity is down since the surge. But he knows that, doesn’t he? So he’s – let’s not mince words – a liar.

This remark

A sullies Bhutto’s memory and her staggeringly couragious work
B. Undermines national confidence in our military and political strength as a nation
C. Is a clear intentional falsehood.
D. Shows this creep Obama will stoop as low as it takes, at any inappropriate moment, to spin anything – even the tragic murder of a potential hero – for his own political gain.

That last one disqualifies him from ever attaining the Presidency, and I hope enough people raise their voices and say so. Politics is dirty and fun is fun, but this goes too far.

Disgraceful.
#218

On December 28th, 2007 at 10:40 am, jungatheart said:

On December 28th, 2007 at 10:29 am, Mr_Conservative_Cat said:
Well, they’ve done it. One of Obama’s foreign policy people has said Bhutto was killed as a result of increased terrorist activity which is a direct result of the Iraq war. It’s Bush’s fault.
If this was actually said, then this should be repeated LOUDLY everywhere in objection to such an unbelieveable outrage.

At the very least, it shows Obama (who is certain to distance himself from the remarks like a coward – when you gonna debate on Fox Mr Couragious President?) has not a clue, if he said this honestly, because terrorist activity is down since the surge. But he knows that, doesn’t he? So he’s – let’s not mince words – a liar.

This remark

A sullies Bhutto’s memory and her staggeringly couragious work
B. Undermines national confidence in our military and political strength as a nation
C. Is a clear intentional falsehood.
D. Shows this creep Obama will stoop as low as it takes, at any inappropriate moment, to spin anything – even the tragic murder of a potential hero – for his own political gain.

That last one disqualifies him from ever attaining the Presidency, and I hope enough people raise their voices and say so. Politics is dirty and fun is fun, but this goes too far.

Disgraceful.

I saw it reported on Fox news and I’m also in love with Megyn Kelly because when she ran the story, she commented; “Who’s going to believe this?” She’s also pretty good to look at. They also said that the reason it was one of Obama’s people rather than himself was so he wouldn’t have to take the heat for it.
#219

On December 28th, 2007 at 10:45 am, Laree said:

This is the article from Christopher Hitchens. He point out the geography where Bhutto was killed, she might have felt she was safe.

http://www.slate.com/id/2180952/
#220

On December 28th, 2007 at 11:23 am, zorro said:

Update Dec. 28, 10:30am. Bhutto buried.

Now, three days of mourning. Pray for Pakistan.

Oh, stoker #157, your comment makes you sound completely uninformed.
#221

On December 28th, 2007 at 11:33 am, Laree said:

The Day After,

http://chickaboomer.blogspot.com/2007/12/pimp-my-hide.html
#222

On December 28th, 2007 at 11:40 am, gandolphxx said:

THE BHUTTO ASSASSINATION: NOT WHAT SHE SEEMED TO BE is worth reading to gain a perspective IMHO.

December 28, 2007 — FOR the next several days, you’re going to read and hear a great deal of pious nonsense in the wake of the assassination of Pakistan’s former prime minister, Benazir Bhutto.

Her country’s better off without her. She may serve Pakistan better after her death than she did in life.

We need have no sympathy with her Islamist assassin and the extremists behind him to recognize that Bhutto was corrupt, divisive, dishonest and utterly devoid of genuine concern for her country.
#223

On December 28th, 2007 at 11:56 am, Laree said:

I can’t believe the delusion and spin from the Left, I am sure this is inconveinent to the Socialist before the Iowa caucus but come on a human being, has been killed. The Left is showing itself for the Souless Shells they are, if you thump their chest do you hear an echo. Attack the Victim when the Victim doesn’t share your political idealogy…this is really in bad taste.
#224

On December 28th, 2007 at 11:59 am, radio relay said:

Benazir, would most likely have been a disaster for Pakistan, if she had been elected, but I am not going to denigrate a woman who displayed astounding courage by returning to Pakistan and trying to run in an environment that is misogynist when it is at it’s best. Not to mention her being a truly moderate Muslim, trying to garner support in the absolute insanity of fundamentalist islam, which has a large following in Pakistan.

She may have been misguided, and fool hardy, but she knew what she was up against, and she had the courage to try to be a voice of change. She wasn’t doing it by lopping off heads, and blowing up people. She was doing it in the non-violent, democratic way.

The forces of evil put a stop to it, and ended her life. However, she is truly martyred and resides with her God. She was a warrior in the struggle to destroy islamic fundamentalism. God bless her.
#225

On December 28th, 2007 at 12:00 pm, Laree said:

I try not to read the Huffington Post some of these comments are surreal.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/27/blitzer-exclusive-bhutto_n_78475.html
#226

On December 28th, 2007 at 1:26 pm, changjin89 said:

Friday Greetings Mrs. Malkin and loyal community. Post #177 reference to the Ralph Peters article is worthy. The position of Ms. Bhutto’s family in Sindh and the rest of Pakistan is well known, and the pluses and minuses of her personality and her terms in office are well-documented. In her country’s distress, her shortcomings were obvious, as are also those of Mr. Musharraf. What she was perceived to bring to the table of governance in Pakistan was unalloyed determination to confront the Islamists infecting her country, especially in the Northwest Frontier provinces and in the Interservice Intelligence (ISI). Mr. Musharraf could no more confront the Islamists himself with his narrow base of support than Neville Chamberlain could undertake a lengthy struggle against Hitlerism with just Conservative Party support. In a “cohabitation” with Mr. Musharraf, the tacit support he has had from Islamist characters in the ISI and elsewhere could presumably be dispensed with. This would make possible a determined fight by the Pakistani federal government against the Islamists. This evident prospect has obviously fuelled the recurrent assassination attempts against Ms. Bhutto until yesterday’s dark success. That after a surgeon’s detailed explanation of Ms. Bhutto’s fatal wounds a “government spokesman” could claim that she died from hitting her head on her vehicle’s sunroof suggests how severely penetrated by Islamists Mr. Musharraf’s government is.
#227

On December 28th, 2007 at 5:49 pm, RetFireman said:

Reading “HuffPo”, “Kos”, “DU” or any of the other lesser known Liberal hate sites for news on this situation, let alone opinion on this event is the qquivalent of going to the “Weekly World News” for fact based reporting and Geraldo Rivera for emotionless and unbiased opinion. I can’t believe anyone is actually doing so and then coming here and stating anything from there as fact.

To say that Pervez was lax on security is doing him a great injustice. How can anyone expect him to provide around the clock 100% guaranteed security for her when our own troops are getting shot by snipers, blown up by homicide bombers and IED’s, and even our own President was almost injured and/or killed by a failed grenade attempt by these most determined of enemies we as a human race have ever faces.

As i have said on so many occassions, the moral compass of the Liberals, the Left-Wing and the Democrats in general is just plain non-existent. It is not there, if it was ever there at all. The Democratic party of FDR, which was at one point very strong, which lead this country against the Nazis and tthe Imperialist Japanese and created a President who asked a country to ask themselves what they could do for their country and not what their country could do for them, seems to have died with that last President on that November day in Dallas in 1963. Since then, they all “Turned off, Dropped Out, and Got high. The drugs and mind altering and genetic mutating substances they took during that period of time has definately had it’s effects on society and even today we are reaping those benefits to where we are living in a sort of Maurice Sendack world that they have created. Nothing seems to be real to them, and everything will be ok if everyone just sits down and just talks it out.

Well kids, the most ethnocentric folks around seems to be your American Liberal. Not everyone on the planet seems to have had the benefit of watching “Sesame Street”. They do not all know nor have they had the benefit of having learned how to play nice with others and speak well. In a huge percentage on this planet, there is only one thing and one thing only that they understand and respect. That is “He with the biggest gun/sword and who knows how to use it and doesn’t back down, gets to make the rules and wins every time!” That was the rule in Nirth Korea, and was definately the rule in Vietnam. Reagan knew that was the rule in the Cold War which is why we won that, and it is most definately the rule in this war against the neophytes we are fighting against in the War Against Islamic Aggression and Global Domination.

There is no State that we can negotiate. This is a way of life, a religion and a political theology we are up against that is hundreds of years old. There is only one end game that they are aware of, and that is the enslavement of all mankind to the will of Islam or the destruction of those that do not bend to that will. PERIOD!. that has been the way since it’s inception, and that will br the way until they are crushed and brought under manageable control or eliminated.

You can talk all the hippie kumbaya love-notwar crap you want, but it will get you nowhere. Go over to an Islamic country and try that. Ask Code Pink what happened when they tried. Ask any Liberal orgaization, and Cristion or Jewish organization that went into an Islamic country that tried to say, “Hey, we are all one people, one planet, we can all get along”, ask them what happened. You might have a hard time finding them…most of them had their heads cut off, were whipped to death or were just plain never heard from again.

You people are fools….pure and simple. You can sit and lambast the COnservatives, the Republicans, Bush, the USA all you want. You can call all the previously stated groups “warmongers”, “Islamophobics” or whatever the Liberal labels are today is, but the fact is, i am right, you are wrong, and every day in the news, I am proven to be and no matter how you attempt to reason it away, ou know damn well that they are not cooperating with you and your excuses.

Al Qaeda, that group you say is made up, does not exist except in a CIA make believe file by the Bush family, killed a woman who was a threat…a real threat…to thm in Pakistan. They are on the ropees due to what Bush is doing and he is doing it without listening to polls and the Libs in Congress, thank God. If he did what you idiots in this country and the Dems in Congress wanted him to do, our body count would be astronomical by this point and we would only have the lokes of YOU to blame.

So shut up, let the “War Mongers” do what they do best, and let’s take care of those ancient bastards who want the world “cleansed with fire” before they get that chance. I don’t know about you, but that is a far more realistic thing right now than Algore’s made up crap about his Global Warming Legacy.
#228

On December 29th, 2007 at 2:01 am, nyc123me said:

RetFireman, I have the impression that these people in complete denial are essentially no different from the jihadis, in that it will never matter how much proof is laid at their feet, they will now and forever on believe what they believe. When an Al Queda jihadist is cutting through the neck of their sons and daughters while they are forced to watch, they will still be in denial. Likewise, the tolerant and peace-loving Islamic extremists will also continue to preach with one hand while murdering with the other. There is no hope for either group anymore. IMHO, it’s us or them, and you can bet your last American cent I will not go quietly.
#229

On December 29th, 2007 at 4:22 am, RetFireman said:

I am with you. It is a matter of “us vs. Them”. the question though, is who are the “us’” and who are the “them’s”. I am of the mind that the seriousness of this situation that has gripped the world has not gripped this nation. this nation is very, incredibly spoiled in its ability to be isolated from the rest of the planet. People here have the blessing and curse of ignoring and not being touched by the violence that every other country on the planet has to endure on a daily basis, thus they can choose to think that it is just a “bumpersticker” war and nothing but a “war for oil” and all for Bush. They are not forced to deal with the horrors of train bombings, car boimbings, cafe and disco bbombings…yet. Just look at the panic that occurred with the anthrax scare. We were getting calls to people’s residences for anything that remotely looked like it. We had one call to an office building for what turned out to be sugar from a powdered doughnut.

The Liberals laugh this all off. They claim we are using “Fear Tactics” in order to win elections. Is it fear tactics when all we do is point out the truth of what is happening in the world? Is it a fear tactic when we tell the American ppopulation the exact quotes that the Terrorist networks have used and threatened us with themselves?

They cannot handle the truth of the matter, and prefer to be kept in the dark. They carry on with empty words about how Bush should have done more to prevent 9-11 and then handcuff him at every turn. Then, when it happens again, and it will, only much, much worse, they will again cry and wail about why not enough was done, all the while conviniently forgetting about all the times they denied that there was a terrorist threat in the first place.

This is going to be a World War like no other. This will end up being fought by ordinary citizens in ordinary towns in ordinary streets. This is going to be fought for EVERYONE’s way of life…not just the American way of life. It will be for the way of life for each individual country…England, France, Italy, Greenland, Brazil, the Phillipines…with weapons owned by those brave and smart enough to have them and to have stockpiled the ammo.

Paranoid? God, I sure hope so. I sure hope that ten years from now, anyone who read this remembers it as the ramblings of a crackpot retired fireman who saw too many classified warning briefings, instead of remembering this as “Crap, that guy was right.”

Let’s just say I never owned guns before a year ago and I haxe two more maybe three to go, and WalMart has GREAT prices on ammo and safes.
#230

On December 29th, 2007 at 9:35 am, Laree said:

All,

I watched some of this last night on CNN this was a good special. CNN isn’t spinning this with the usual political bias. I also noticed the comments on the Huffington Post Blog, they were bashing Wolf Blitzer for being biased toward the Bush Administration….BEzzar! The Left doesn’t want to hear the reality. They even bash their favorite cablenews outlet, when they report the straight news without a slant. I think that is the sad state of affairs on the Left, they see everything through a political prizm, they can’t see anything “clearly” without filtering it through their political idealogy first.

I think this is a clash of cultures, even more so after watching the CNN special last night, that was remarkably candid for CNN, not the usual terrorist apologist.

http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/12/27/cnn-to-air-pakistan-doc-tonight/
#231

On December 29th, 2007 at 9:46 am, Laree said:

This youtube video is Bhutto being interviewed by David Frost in Nov 2007 she names names she believes was involved in the first assassination attempt when she returned to Pakistan. 6:12 in the video, she claims Bin Laden was killed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIO8B6fpFSQ
#232

On December 29th, 2007 at 10:13 am, RetFireman said:

The ant and the Grasshopper