portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary global

imperialism & war

Bush Gains from Bhutto Assasination

Disaster Capitalism. Bush and Bush crime family affiliates gain from any major crisis that fans the flames of his "war on terror."
The assasination may have been a Bush operation. U.S. Intelligence cells could have set up the hit working with extremist groups.

The motive would be the perpetuation of the tremendously profitable "war on terror." Keeping it on the front burner as opposed to the climate change issue.

Keeping Musharraf in power and Pakistan divided is in the interests of the Bush regime. Its called Divide and Conquer. Its the first rule in the Bush rule book of how to rule.

Bush doesn't want to be ignored and ridiculed. That hatemonger will do anything to maintain his rule.

YEP! 27.Dec.2007 12:57

CT

No two ways about it, if something BAD happens in this world, you can bet Bush was behind it.

This type of commentary is silly 27.Dec.2007 13:35

StevetheGreen

While no-one despises the current administration (and everything it stands for) more than me, to simply blame Bush for the death of Bhutto void of any evidence (and for that matter, even a cogent logical theory) is exactly what gives the advocates of the status quo the right to label people "Bush bashers" without really considering their point of view.

While it is certainly plausible that the CIA (or some other US sponsored group) was responsible for the assasination of Bhutto, it is also just as plausible that the radical factions in Pakistan killed her.

It is also possible that US "interests" helped facilitate extremists in the murder of Bhutto as they did on 9/11.

But to just post crap like this on Indymedia makes everyone who reads it, a little dumber than they were before they did.

bhutto's death a blow to bush in fact 27.Dec.2007 14:39

Rosa

Bhutto was a pawn of the US, and of Bush, which makes her death a blow to the US.

Additional Comments 28.Dec.2007 22:55

Anon Anon

Steve The Greens remarks are appreciated, though they are not accurate:

"While no-one despises the current administration (and everything it stands for) more than me, to simply blame Bush for the death of Bhutto void of any evidence (and for that matter, even a cogent logical theory) is exactly what gives the advocates of the status quo the right to label people "Bush bashers" without really considering their point of view."

No blame was assigned. One should consider motive when identifying suspects.

"But to just post crap like this on Indymedia makes everyone who reads it, a little dumber than they were before they did."

Too harsh, perhaps even angry, and not really accurate.

* * * * *

Anyway, the Bhutto assassination could also be a useful psy-op intimidation tactic directed at U.S. democratic presidential candidates particularly Hillary Clinton. The message being, "see what can happen to women who challenge the Patriarch."

There was also that "hostage taking" incident recently at one of Hillary's campaign offices. Something didn't smell right there.

Outside of family and possibly "friends", individuals are important to Bush insofar as they further his socioeconomic ideologies. Bush wants privitization worldwide, the maintanence of wealth and income stratification, and the preservation of familial dynasties. Bush hated the 60's so much because they threatened his family's dynastic grip on power and rule. His hatemongering channels into the wrecking of government agencies.

In short, whether Bush was involved or not, the killing of Bhutto throws Pakistan into disarray and thats good for contractor buddies and distracting the American people. The bush administration has been very good at creating diversions and distractions.

The reality is that the Bush administrations's real interests can line up with those of the very extremists he makes the object of the "war on terror." A stupid phrase. No war, just crimes, criminal behavior, and sometimes, somewhat organized violence. Invasion and occupation too. And all the rationalizations that go with it.

Imagine, even at this late date, our media is chock-full of basically "middle men white guys" who blather and offer their opinions in front of the camera. Sickening. What about the Iraqis?" They are the ones who should constantly be in front of the cameras.

Imagine, people in the US are still in the grip of an "us and them" mentality. Its barbaric really. And just like how the west was won--a frontier in the middle, indians, calvary and "pioneers" on one side, and american citizenry on the other.

Not surprising though. Just look around at what's actually going on in people's minds and how they behave in their daily lives. The ego loves to justify itself and its endeavors in the world. Its negativity too, and there's plenty of that these days! Lol. That's what the push back on the 60s has been all about, the collective ego couldn't handle it, and contracted back away from love into negativity in all its manifestations.

American adults take themselves too seriously. Just look at the cars people drive. Particularly the big honcho pickup trucks and SUVs perpetually racing and roaring around.

Oh yes, the objective of the day is oh so important!

For some it is. For others, it isn't.

Total reform of the media. Remove the middlemen. Abolish all corporate funding of the PBS Newshour. Thats just one example. Connect with all the peoples of the world so they are seen and known as people right here, right now. Not distant objects far away that can be bombed without a care in the world.


[End of "op-ed" for now.]

To Anon 29.Dec.2007 07:41

StevetheGreen

Perhaps my comments were a bit harsh, but consider this.

Of the many reasons, the biggest reason that the Bush administration has not been held accountable for it's crimes is because the misinformation provacatuers have convinced a significant sector of the population that calls for impeachment are partisan in nature and have no basis in law.

They are able to accomplish this because of people who throw loose accusations around based on suspicion and little evidence. This the same reason that the 9/11 truth movement has not made more ground in over 6 years.

While I have no doubt that US intelligence was involved in some way with Bhutto's assasination, I don't know that they did and have nothing of real substance to even make the claim. Yes! I can consider the possibility based on the United State's long track record of such activities. I can even concede that the Bush admin has a strong interest in keeping Musharaff in power. But without any substantive evidence, we need to ask ourselves if we do more harm than good when we announce our personal conspiracy theories on the internet.

I like to take the approach of asking questions instead of making claims which I believe accomplishes the same thing. I.E. Get people to utilize their critical thinking skills and put two and two together when things like this occure in the future.

Anyway, sorry if I was to harsh in my earlier commetns, but I have watched the 9/11 truth movement destroy any hope it had of becoming mainstream in the United States because of irresponsible conjecture.

SteveTheGreen Thankyou 29.Dec.2007 10:34

Anon Anon

Thankyou for your most recent remarks.