I Call B*llshit on the Bhutto Assassination
It has scarcely been 24 hours since Benazir Bhutto was assassinated in Pakistan and already my bullshit meter is off the charts. Here is a quick rundown of the conflicting narratives currently fighting for the place of the "Official Conspiracy Theory" (OCT) of the Bhutto assassination.
Earlier today news outlets were running a news story similar to this one:
in which the Bhutto assassination was described thusly: "Bhutto died of a gunshot wound to the neck, the Pakistani Interior Ministry said. The attacker then blew himself up. The bomb attack killed at least 22 others, doctors said."
In other words, the gunman and the suicide bomber were the same person, and he blew himself up after the attack to avoid being captured, and also possibly in the hopes of becoming a martyr.
However, currently the big story on the Indian news wires is the eyewitness reports of Bhutto actually being assassinated by two separate snipers firing from a nearby building. As two snipers would tend to indicate some level of coordination and planning, as well as training for how to shoot someone with a sniper rifle from long range, it suggests military involvement, possibly even the involvement of the Pakistani clandestine operations agency, the ISI, which has long and demonstrable ties to both the CIA and the 9/11 attacks (for a quick refresher Mahmoud Ahmed, the head of the ISI, wired $100,000 dollars to Mohammed Atta, the supposed lead hijacker on 9/11, shortly before the attacks.) The sniper reports are spreading throughout the media now:
"Former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, 54, was shot at and killed by at least two snipers before a suicide bomb attack on the periphery of her carcade."
From the International Herald Tribune: "But witnesses described a sniper firing from a nearby building, raising questions about how well the government had protected her in a usually well-guarded garrison town and fueling speculation that government sympathizers had played a part."
And the Philadelphia Inquirer reports: "Rumors are swirling that the bullet that killed her came from a sniper, and that the suicide bomber was meant to cover his tracks."
Eager to establish the OCT as quickly as possible, Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan has supposedly claimed responsibility for the attack. Reuters UK is reporting:
"Al Qaeda is the chief suspect in the murder of Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto."
Newsweek already has an article entitled "Almost Certainly Al Qaeda." Sound familiar?
And CNN is reporting: "The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security issued a bulletin Thursday citing an alleged claim of responsibility by al Qaeda for former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto's assassination, a DHS official told CNN."
However, CNN even admits "The source of the claim was apparently Italian news agency, Adnkronos International (AKI), which said that al Qaeda Afghanistan commander and spokesman Mustafa Abu Al-Yazid had telephoned the agency to make the claim."
Every news outlet reporting on this draws as its source this one supposed claim made to this Italian news agency. But, CNN says, "such a claim has not appeared on radical Islamist Web sites that regularly post such messages from al Qaeda and other militant groups."
So what is happening here? What was the intent of this assassination? Was this meant as the spark that ignites WWIII, much like the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand which ignited WWI?
There are rumors swirling that the suicide bomber was meant as a distraction, to provide a reason for Bhutto to get out of the car in order to give the snipers a clear shot, but when she stuck her head out to greet onlookers the snipers took their shot and the suicide bomber was no longer necessary but it was too late.
I don't know what how this assassination was supposed to take place nor do I know what this assassination was meant to cause. I do know that my bullshit meter is now off the charts. In closing, consider this:
When googling the news for bhutto and sniper, on the first page one gets a link to a Washington Post excerpt that reads: "The classic use of a sniper to cut her down as at least one suicide bomber blew up her vehicle bore the hallmarks of a Pakistani suicide squad expertly ..." However, when you click the link to the article, you find that that sentence has been heavily edited to now read: "The attack -- a gunman cut her down before a suicide-bomb explosion blew up her vehicle, early reports suggest -- bore the hallmarks of training by the al-Qaeda terrorists ensconced in northwest Pakistan." Notice how the word sniper has been removed entirely, the key words at least one suicide bomber were changed to the more vague suicide-bomb explosion, and the attacks now bear the hallmarks of al-Qaeda terrorists and not a Pakistani suicide squad.
"If all records told the same tale, then the lie passed into history and became truth."
- George Orwell, 1984