CODEPINK in Pakistan

I first heard that CODEPINK was going to Pakistan protest the drone strikes, when I was covering the Republican National Convention. CODEPINK was literally everywhere during the convention. Pakistan is the country where the late Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was murdered. Pakistan is a very unfriendly place for Westerners.

Threats of violence do not deter CODEPINK. These women have been arrested seceral times. They alway have a high level understanding about security. CODEPINK was able to break into a Condoleezza Rice speech, in Ybor City, that was protected by the Secret Service. CODEPINk demanded Rice's arrest for war crimes.

The Pakistan ATM Machine

I attended the Lara Logan lecture at USF tonight. I was in agreement with Logan that Pakistan is not ally to the United States. Logan is convinced that the ISI knew Osama bin Laden's whereabouts. Bin Laden wasn't hiding in a cave. He was in a comfy compound near a military academy. This is like Timothy McVeigh going into hiding near West Point.

I asked Logan why the United States, under the past two administration's, have giving money to the Pakistani government. The United States has become the ATM machine for a corrupt regime. Logan told me that was a good question. She has asked several government officials and they all told her that Pakistan has to be paid off because it is a nuclear power. Never mind that the Pakistan and Taliban run joint military operations against the U.S. military. Or that the Pakistan aid money is used to buy the Taliban IEDs and assaust rifles.

Logan said she doesn't buy any of the arguments for providing aid to the Pakistani government. Logan used the analogy that if this a dating relationship there would have been a break-up a long time ago. Logan pointed out the blame for staying in this dysfunctional relationship with Pakistan resides with policymakers with no understanding or real accountability with the lives of soldiers they sacrifice.

I also asked Logan why the Republican presidential candidates can only discuss Israel and Iran. Do they only have a map with two countries or are they too dense to know of other countries in crisis. I cited Syria and Sudan as two example.

Logan's description of the GOP candidates was hysterical. Logan described Mitt Romney as a member of "a cult." Logan mentioned that Rick Santorum used to bring a model fetus on the floor of the Senate. She said even Republicans don't want Gingrich.

Logan made a slight dig at bloggers earlier in the lecture. I mentioned that I was a blogger.

Logan: Your not living in your mother's basement.

Hussey: And I'm not wearing pajamas.

One young man made the mistake of getting on Logan's bad side with a WikiLeaks question and left the microphone with his tail between his legs. Logan feels strongly that WikiLeaks got an Afghan man killed.

I hope there is video of Logan's lecture. It was fantastic.

Update: Logan's hysterical account of meeting Michael

“It had about 13 hours of interviews over two days with a gazillion al-Qaida and Arabic names thrown in there, and lots of nuance and it was very, very intense,” she said. “So when I jumped on the plane and rushed down to see a Michael Bublé concert in San Jose, it was sort of surreal. I remember when Michael walked up to me and said … ‘I hope you’re going to do a good interview.’ I said, ‘Listen, the last person I interviewed was a FBI agent and I made that f----- cry.’”

Question of the Night

Could Obama have handled the Afghanistan war better?

I admit, this is a bit of a trick question. During the 2008 election, I felt bad for whoever was handed this shit sandwich after winning in November -- I didn't think there were any good choices then, and I still don't now. Maybe the best choice would have been to pull troops out immediately starting in 2009, but Republicans would have hammered Obama for that choice until Kingdom Come. And while I could criticize Obama for playing politics by setting timetables for troop withdrawls to be completed after the 2012 election, it's not like he had this other, obviously better option to go with.

In fact, any time I try thinking of what Obama is responsible for in Afghanistan, I keep circling back to the Bush Administration. It was Bush who ignored Afghanistan to wage a needless war in Iraq. It was Bush who installed the ineffective Karzai, who has delusions of dictatorship. It was Bush who never built up Afghanistan's defense forces to secure the country before he left office. Bush had six years to do this and he didn't get past square one. Indeed, one has to question how much of a united polity Afghanistan is -- as opposed to a loose federation of tribes who aren't friendly with each other under an arbitrary national border -- yet it was Bush who convinced that we could go "nation building" in Afghanistan. It was also Bush who oversaw a corrupt national rebuilding effort in Afghanistan where the military gave money to contractors, who took a cut and hired other contractors, who took a cut and... Well, you get the picture. Who knows how many pennies were left to build a school after this process, all to have that school destroyed by the Taliban because we never built up Afghan's security forces to protect the country.

And now... Well, Osama bin Laden was killed in Pakistan, and we're in "peace talks" with the brutal Taliban regime our military pledged to defeat; yet cannot defeat because, like bin Laden, the Taliban take refuge in Pakistan. So we're fighting a war we're not sure we can even war in the wrong place.

This is the definition of a "clusterfuck". Obama's crime lies in continuing the Afghanistan war, and he didn't have much choice in the matter when he entered office.

So the blame for this mess lies solely with former President Bush. This $429 billion mistake, funded after Bush's $1.35 trillion tax cut in 2001, must be considered a major reason for why our country is broke and discussing austerity measures right now. Indeed, this is how Bush's shameful legacy will effect us for years to come.

Blast From the Past: Sen Obama On Going After OBL

Remember when John McCain and Hillary Clinton said Barack Obama was foolish for saying he would order action against Osama bin Laden. Regardless of whether or not he had the permission of the Pakistan government. McCain attempted to portray Obama as experience since McCain was so right about Iraq.

Google Maps View of Osama Bin Laden's Hideout.

View Larger Map

OSL's lair was a big place. The Pakistani government wasn't looking very hard for this place.

Arianna Huffington Asks Joe Biden to Resign

Arianna Huffington tells Ron Reagan of Air America that Vice-President Joe Biden should resign in protest of U.S. troop increases to Afghanistan. Biden's opposition to Gen. Stanley McChrystal's 40,000 troop request earned him a Newsweek cover story. There was a fascinating exchange in the White House.

Joe Biden had a question. During a long Sunday meeting with President Obama and top national-security advisers on Sept. 13, the VP interjected, "Can I just clarify a factual point? How much will we spend this year on Afghanistan?" Someone provided the figure: $65 billion. "And how much will we spend on Pakistan?" Another figure was supplied: $2.25 billion. "Well, by my calculations that's a 30-to-1 ratio in favor of Afghanistan. So I have a question. Al Qaeda is almost all in Pakistan, and Pakistan has nuclear weapons. And yet for every dollar we're spending in Pakistan, we're spending $30 in Afghanistan. Does that make strategic sense?" The White House Situation Room fell silent. But the questions had their desired effect: those gathered began putting more thought into Pakistan as the key theater in the region.

U.S. forces have pushed al-Qaeda into Pakistan. CBS News cheir foreign correspondant Lara Logan said Afghanistan is the spiritual home of al-Qaeda. The Taliban is intent on taking back Afghanistan. The Taliban will allow al-Qaeda to set up safe havens in Afghanistan. Logan states the Afghanistan government is too unstable to fight al-Qaeda. The questions about President Hamid Karzai's future also cloud matters. Members of the White House, leaked to the media, that they have lost confidence in Karzai. So far, the White House has not called for Karzai to publicly step down.

Biden is right about Pakistan. The Swat Valley has become an international human rights crisis. The Pakistani people were divided over the Taliban. The cruelity displayed by the Taliban turned the Pakistani people. President Barack Obama just signed a $7.5 billion aid bill for Pakistan. What the longterm policy for Pakistan is uncertain. The United States is launching predator drone attacks on terrorist targets.

The issues in Afghanistan and Pakistan demand someone that is willing to challenge the President. Vice-President Biden will do a greater service to his country in office than out. Resigning out of protest would draw headlines. The move would be a one time ploy and Biden would have no voice on policy once he leaves.

Pakistan United Nations Building Attacked

Terroists are pushing to deteriorate stability in Pakistan. The Pakistani military have launched a brutal counter insurgency operation against the Taliban. Terrorist retaliation attacks have gotten more fierce. suicide bomber struck the United Nations food agency.

The United Nations announced it was temporarily closing all its offices in Pakistan after the noontime bombing, which blew out windows and left victims lying in pools of blood in the lobby of the three-story World Food Program compound.

"This is a heinous crime committed against those who have been working tirelessly to assist the poor and vulnerable on the front lines of hunger and other human suffering in Pakistan," U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said in Geneva.

Since the counter-insurgency, the New York Times report scivilian casualities have decreased in Pakistan. The Taliban was killing civilians at will in the Swat Valley. Pressure needs to be kept on the Taliban and al-Qaeda elements in Pakistan. al-Qaeda operations chief Ilyas Kashmiri and hundreds of fighters have been killed by drone attacks. The decision on the Afghanistan policy will greatly decide the ability , of the United States, to strike terrorists in Pakistan.

Saad bin Laden May Be Dead

The Associated Press is reporting Osama bin Laden's son Saad may be dead.

Saad bin Laden, a son of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, may have been killed in a U.S. airstrike, U.S. officials said Thursday. The son was likely killed in Pakistan in the last several months, approximately in late spring, said a counterterrorism official, one of three Obama administration officials who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence.

Though many in the intelligence community believe he is dead, they can't be 100 percent certain because no body or DNA evidence was recovered to prove it, one official said.

The Washington Post confirmed the story of Saad's possible death through their own source.

"There are some indications that he may be dead, but it's not 100 percent certain," said a Washington-based counterterrorism official who spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitive nature of CIA operations along the Pakistan-Afghanistan frontier. He declined to say precisely when and where the strike occurred.

Saad served as a messanger between his father and the Quds Force of Iran. al-Qaeda used verbal messangers to avoid communication through cell phones and the internet. The Quds Force helps train and equip Islamic terrorists. Saad lived in Iran and Pakistan after the United States invasion of Afghanistan.

Intelligence official will never be completely certain if Saad is dead. The ability to find a body in Taliban-controlled Pakistan makes the task all but impossible.

More Trouble In Swat

The Pakistani government attempted a cease-fire with the Taliban in Swat. The government gave in to the Taliban's demands to impose Islamic law in the Swat Valley. The policy has been a disaster for women's rights. The Taliban has burned girl schools and beheaded people. Residents have fled to camps in Peshawar.

The Swat Valley Taliban's leader is Maulana Fazlullah. He started a pirate radio station in 2006. Fazlullah forbids Swat citizens from dancing and music. This was the message Fazlullah delivered to music centers.

"Close within three days – or you will be blown away".

Fazlullah forbid Swat residents from getting polo vaccinations. 160,000 children did not get vaccinations because Fazlullah claimed the vaccine causes impotency. Fazlullah's radio station started the rumor that the vaccine contained oestrogen. This was proven to be false.

"To cure a disease before its on set is not in accordance with Shariah’s laws," said Fazlullah. "I have never opposed Polio vaccination, but I say if the people are unwilling for it, they should not be forced. Keeping in mind if I say “No” to Polio Vaccination, you would not find a single child to drink a drop of it anywhere in Swat."

If Fazlullah didn't oppose polio vaccinations then why did he tell his listeners health care workers were part of "a conspiracy of the Jews and Christians to stunt the population growth of Muslims"? World Health Organisation were repeatedly assaulted and Fazlullah never once complained about their treatment. The reason is many of the attackers are part of Fazlullah militia.

In March, the Pakistani government agreed to another cease-fire with Fazlullah and his followers. Once again the cease-fire was broken. The Pakistani government continues to be in denial. Hillary Clinton said the Pakistani government was "basically abdicating to the Taliban." This is madness. The Taliban have militia elements in Buner. That places Taliban forces closer to Islamabad.

The move by Taliban-backed militants into the Buner district of northwestern Pakistan, closer than ever to Pakistan's capital of Islamabad, have prompted concerns both within the country and abroad that the nuclear-armed nation of 165 million is on the verge of inexorable collapse.

On Wednesday a local Taliban militia crossed from the Swat Valley - where a February cease-fire allowed the implementation of strict Islamic, or Shari'a, law - into the neighboring Buner district, which is just a few hours drive from Islamabad (65 miles, separated by a mountain range, as the crow flies). ((See pictures on the frontlines in the battle against the Taliban.)

Residents streaming from Buner, home to nearly a million people, told local newspapers that armed militants are patrolling the streets. Pakistani television stations aired footage of Taliban soldiers looting government offices and capturing vehicles belonging to aid organizations and development projects. The police, say residents, are nowhere to be seen. The shrine of a local Muslim saint, venerated across the country, was closed. The Taliban, which adheres to a stricter version of Islam than is practiced in most of Pakistan, hold that worship at such shrines goes against the teachings of Islam.

The Obama administration needs to figure out what to do about Pakistan's nuclear weapons. South Korea or Iran isn't the big threat. Pakistan's government is going to fall. It is only a matter of when. The idea of nukes in Fazlullah's pocession is terrifying.

Update: Lara Logan has a story on the current crisis.

Taliban Cease-Fire In Swat

The Wall Street Journal reports the Taliban agreed to a ten day cease-fire with the Pakistani government. The catch is the government will impose Islamic law in the Swat Valley. This will allow the Taliban to continue to violate the the civil rights of women. 162 girl schools were destroyed by Maulana Fazalullah and Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan.

It is unlikely the Taliban will honor the cease-fire. In 2007, 72 police officers in Swat were murdered. The Taliban are beheading those that oppose them. The Taliban control the majority of Swat and are using the valley as a staging ground for attacks in Afghanistan. President Asif Ali Zardari admits his government has been in a state of denial about the Taliban threat.

“It’s been happening over time and it’s happened out of denial,” Zardari told CBS, when asked how militants had secured a foothold in the Swat Valley, only 250 kilometers (155 miles) north of the capital, Islamabad.

“Everyone was in denial that they’re weak and they won’t be able to take over, they won’t be able to give us a challenge,” Zardari said, in excerpts from the interview aired on the broadcaster’s Web site yesterday. “Our forces weren’t increased and therefore we have weaknesses, and they are taking advantage of that weakness.”

The cease-fire is another form of denial. The Taliban look at the Pakistani government as pro-America. The Taliban will not tolerate anything they deem as a Western influence.

The humanitarian crisis has grown grave. The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs estimates 900,000 Swat residents are affected by the war. Many will be forced to flee their homes. The refugee camps have become unmanageable.

Pakistan is a country with nuclear technology and fighting religious extremists. Relations with India are hostile. Neighboring Afghanistan is unstable. U.S. policymakers need to quickly decide what to do about Pakistan. The matter is too urgent for partisan bickering.

Swat

A female resident the Swat area of Pakistan told American special envoy, Richard C. Holbrooke, her husband was murdered by the Taliban. Last year, 162 girl schools in Swat were destroyed by the Taliban. The messege is Pakistani women are not allowed an education. The Taliban will bomb or burn the cchool to achieve receive complete female submission.

The North-West Frontier Province has experienced similar violence. Yasmeen Hassan, Equality Now's Deputy Director of Programs details the suffering endured by women.

“The attacks and threats have not been confined to schoolgirls. Women and girls have been ordered to wear full veils. Directives have been issued requiring that women be accompanied by male family members in public places and forbidding women from carrying compulsory government identification cards displaying their photographs. About a dozen women have been shot for "immoral activities," including Bakht Zeba, a 45-year-old social worker committed to advancing girls' education.”

The Pakistan military has lost control of Swat. Al Jazeera's Kamal Hyder reports the Taliban is the unofficial government of the area. The Taliban has decapitated the heads of policemen. Residents are fleeing for relief camps.

Swat has long had jihadist elements. In 2001, Sufi Muhammad Khan led 10,000 followers out of Swat to fight NATO troops invading Afghanistan. His son-in-law, Maulana Fazalullah, went on a campaign against young girls going to school. Today Fazalullah is the leader of Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan. He is engaged in a war with the Pakistani military.

Gotcha Pakistan Policy

Sarah Palin was questioned, by voter Michael Rovito, if U.S. troops should cross into Pakistan's border.

When asked by Rovito whether the U.S. should conduct cross-border raids into Pakistan fom Afghanistan, Palin responded, "If that’s what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should."

The answer is pretty cut and dried. John McCain and Sarah Palin sat down together in a joint interview with Katie Couric. Both candidates denied that Palin said what she said. Hilarity ensues.



Is this an SNL skit or actual interview? McCain is sitting with Palin to do a damage control interview. McCain uses the attack-the-journalist tactic George H.W. Bush used on Dan Rather.

John McCain: Of course not. But, look, I understand this day and age of "gotcha" journalism. Is that a pizza place? In a conversation with someone who you didn't hear … the question very well, you don't know the context of the conversation, grab a phrase. Gov. Palin and I agree that you don't announce that you're going to attack another country …

Couric: Are you sorry you said it?

McCain: … and the fact …

Couric: Governor?

McCain: Wait a minute. Before you say, "is she sorry she said it," this was a "gotcha" sound bite that, look …

Couric: It wasn't a "gotcha." She was talking to a voter.

McCain: No, she was in a conversation with a group of people and talking back and forth. And … I'll let Gov. Palin speak for herself.

Palin: Well, it … in fact, you're absolutely right on. In the context, this was a voter, a constituent, hollering out a question from across an area asking, "What are you gonna do about Pakistan? You better have an answer to Pakistan." I said we're gonna do what we have to do to protect the United States of America.

What McCain calls "gotcha journalism" is actually holding politicians accountable for their words. The Pakistan issue is serious and voters have a right to know if McCain and Palin agree. The quote above clearly shows Palin saying that it may be necessary to send troops over the Pakistan border. McCain and Palin are clearly lying about what was said. McCain's "gotcha journalism" comment will win applauds from partisan Republicans that care nothing about holding politicians accountable. Except when it serves their party's purpose.

McCain's policy on Pakistan makes no sense. Pakistan is moving away from the United States and has never shown the desire to go into the mountain regions (which the Pakistan government has no authority) and hunt Taliban and al-Qaeda forces. The Pakistani government would rather ignore extremists than angers citizens xenophobic of Western presence. The Pakistan government will take U.S. money. But will not lift a finger to fight terrorism.

Without Borders

Take a long hard look at the map. Can someone explain to me where Pakistan and Iraq border each other? John McCain cited an imaginary border where much works needs to done. Perhaps this work is physically moving the two countries next to each other.



Q: Do you agree the situation in Afghanistan is precarious and urgent?

McCain: Oh, I think it's very serious...

Q: Not precarious and urgent?

McCain: Oh, I don't know (mumbles) run through the vocabulary, but it's a very... it's a serious situation. But there are a lot of things we need to do. We have a lot of work to do and I'm afraid it's a very hard struggle. Particularly, given the situation of the Iraq/Pakistan border.

Somewhere right now Jim Johnson's head is exploding.

Lies, damn lies, and videotape

From Slate's "Today's Papers column:

Meanwhile, the New York Times all but states that the government is lying about how Bhutto died in order to deflect blame for lax security.

So that's why Musharraf's government is lying? Honestly, I never saw it that way since, whether it was by gunshot, bomb blast, or anything short of a massive heart attack, I knew the Pakiistan government was responsible in some way, shape, or form. The assassination took place in Rawalpindi -- a city less than 10 miles to the south of Islamabad, and the seat of military power in Pakistan. The first thing I read about Rawalpindi, in 2003 after the assassination attempts against Musharraf, is that "even a bird would not remain undetected or unchallenged" in a city with such a military clampdown on it. So to bicker over how Bhutto died is a moot point -- a point that everyone seems to have missed -- given the fact that it happened in Rawalpindi, which instantly makes the government responsible. Period.

But Musharraf's government is learning a lesson on how not to lie in the digital media age where everyone has a video camera in their pockets, and news broadcast in one nation can spread like a virus through the Internet. Fifteen, maybe even ten years ago, government's could participate in the kind of coverup tried by Musharraf's administration and succeed in duping most people, but not anymore. Truth trumps all.

And the truth came out in this video of a UK's Channel 4 news broadcast, which clearly shows the gunman shooting and Bhutto being shot. (Did I mention that it's not a pretty video?) Additionally -- and maybe most importantly -- it shows a lack of security and police around Bhutto's vehicle. The gunman fired at pracitically point blank range.

Dawn, Pakistan's leading English daily paper, published photographs of the gunman and suicide bomber before Channel 4's video came out. After looking at the photos, Dawn proclaims: "The fact that an armed assassin managed to get just a couple of metres away from Ms Bhutto clearly gives the lie to the government claim that she had received a VIP security cover."

So, what does Musharraf have to say now? I imagine he'll speak via actions. After his government's lies being exposed for the frauds they are, and realizing this will play against him in the elections, he'll probably attempt to postpone those elections. I'm sure we'll know what his response is soon.

[Crossposted from Sugar Land is Dreaming]

More On Benzir Bhutto

Pakistani authorities can determine that Benzir Bhutto died from hitting her head without performing an autopsy. Nevermind the gunshot wounds inflicted upon Bhutto. It gives pause when the government quickly blames Al Qaeda.

Ayman al-Zawahiri of Al Qaeda claimed responsibility. But the Pakistani government is hardly running a CSI-style investigation. The other problem is their credibility has been shot a long time ago. The Pakistani people believe that the military was behind the assassination.

Developing

The Fallout From Benazir Bhutto's Death

AlJazeera reports that Benazir Bhutto was shot in the chest and neck. She was pronounced dead at the hospital. Tas noted there was coflicting reports of how Bhutto died.



President Bush called the assassination "cowardly" andurged Pakistan to follow through with their election. President Pervez Musharraf is considering postponing the election. Professor Joe Elder warns that Pakistan will take a step back if elections are delayed.

"The fact that the election could be delayed and a major candidate has been killed makes it very difficult to go ahead with establishing the impression that Pakistan has at last returned to a democratic process," said Joe Elder, professor of sociology and a specialist on Pakistan at the University of Wisconsin. "This is a very serious blow to the democratic process in Pakistan."

Musharraf comes out the winner in this. Democratic reform is a threat to his power. Musharraf took power in a military coup and named himself President. He recently declared marshall law and arrested political opponents. It is doubtful he is shedding tears over Bhutto's death.

The assassination may make Bhutto a martyr. That would be damaging to
Musharraf and the United States. For too long America has invested in Musharraf and gotten nothing in return. Musharraf signed a peace treaty with the Taliban. The whole purpose of the United States backing Musharraf was for his government to disrupt Taliban and Al Qaeda forces. The Bush administration should have pulled financial aid the moment Pakistan (temporarily) stopped fighting terrorism.

Anti-American sentiment will be strong in a post Musharraf government. Musharraf is hated by his people and the United States has backed him. Hardly a way to win the hearts and minds of the Pakistani people.

The question is who is responsible for Bhutto's death? The assassin blew himself up. Law enforcement can not question a dead man. The Pakistan government is corrupt and incompetent. Foreign pressure and assistance is the only way to insure a proper investigation.

Update: Scott Stanzel gives a horrible press briefing. He tells the press corp that it is to Pakistan if they want to postpone elections. Stanzel says it is up to Pakistan how they investigate Bhutto's assassination. Stanzel gives the impression that the White House has no idea how to handle the situation.

Stanzel is asked how aid money to Pakistan has been wasted. Stanzel defends Pakistan. At what point does the White House start putting the pressure on Musharraf.

Bhutto assassinated, questions arise

[Many updates below.]

Benazir Bhutto, former Pakistani Prime Minister, and political enemy of President Musharraf because of her wishes to be the harbinger of democray in Pakistan, was assassinated today. As anyone who follows Pakistan can tell you, this is bad.

Before continuing with this post, let me note that I have only seen headlines and heard radio reports about her assassination at this point -- I have yet to read an article. But given two key facts that I've already gleaned -- this was done by a suicide attacker at close range and in the city of Rawalpindi -- my instincts scream to me that there's a strong possiibility that the Pakistani military had some involvement in this.

We had to write a paper on an international situation for my world politics class last semester, and I choose to research power struggles in Pakistan. It's a topic I've followed for a while. Rawalpindi came up in my paper since, in 2003, it's where two failed assassination attempts on Musharraf's life were executed. So here's what I had to say about the city a month ago:

It is bad enough that the normal amount of security that President Musharraf employs failed to stop [the assassination attempts] from happening, but his security situation looks more desperate when you take into account that the December, 2003 assassination attempts took place Rawalpindi, a city which is the seat of military power in Pakistan. Being located less than ten miles to the south of Islamabad, the city is home to a Pakistan Army corps that can hold sway in any potential coup, so leaders of Pakistan always appoint a general they can trust to run the Rawalpindi Corps (also known as “10 Corps” and “X Corps”). Case in point, one of the last commanders of the Rawalpindi Corps was General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani –- the man President Musharraf just picked to replace himself as the Chief of Staff for Pakistan's Army.

Attesting to the military power of the Rawalpindi, Gopalapuram Parthasarathy, formerly an envoy to Islamabad from India, said the assassination attempts “took place in the most heavily militarized portion of any town in Pakistan”; and he added, “it is inconceivable that such a thing could be done without certain sections within the army conniving or assisting, or both” (Hindustan Times).

These assassination attempts could not have been launched, nevermind come close to being successful, without help from members of Pakistan's military and intelligence apparatuses being sympathetic to Islamic extremists. It is not surprising that some “low-ranking air force and army officers” were later arrested for their complicity in the assassination attempts (McGirk). Even though the sum of sympathizes could be tiny, assassination attempts like these show the massive power they wield that could potentially change the government of Pakistan. Such a government installed by Islamic extremist sympathizers would have an enormous negative effect on Middle Eastern and Central Asian affairs.

This might be the most important story of the year, and I'll be keeping a close eye on developments. But if I were to place a bet in assigning blame for this tragedy, my implications would go straight to the top. I know such accusations have to be proven, but Bhutto's assassination could have Musharraf's dirty fingerprints all over it. Let's just say that I wouldn't be surprised if he was involved.

[Update - 10:35] It was an explosion that killed Bhutto and 20 of her followers. Afterwards, iit was followed by gunshots.

Around 10:15 thiis morning, BBC World Service reported on the security situation wiith Bhutto rallies. The BBC said that the Bhutto campaign complained about not getting extra police and "jammers" from the Pakistani government; but the government did warn the Bhutto campaign of terrorist threats towards her rallies.

The "jammers" portion of that report is most important. The BBC referred to electronic jamming equipment that delays bombs from going off. The United States provided this jamming technology to President Musharraf in 2003 (as noted in the book, "The Four Faces of Nuclear Terrorism," on page 77). And the jamming equipment saved Musharraf's life -- in Rawalpindi -- during the first assassination attempt in him in December, 2003; it delayed a bomb planted under a bridge that Musharraf's limo was passing over.

So if Musharraf's government had such jamming equipment since 2003, and the saved Musharraf's life in Rawalpindi, why wasn't such equipment provided to Bhutto when she visited Rawalpindi?

[Update - 10:45] Over at Newshoggers, Shamanic notes that a sniper opened fire on a rally for Nawaz Shariif, also in Rawalpindi. This attack took place before the suicide bombing of Bhutto. Dawn, Pakistan's leading English daily, reports that these attacks left four dead.

[Update - 10:50] The question of jamming equipment may be elementary at this point. BBC World Service just reported that Bhutto was shot in the neck before a suicide bomber blew himself up. At this point, I'm not sure how many people were involved in the attacks or what the direct cause of Bhutto's death was.

[Update - 11:15] The Independent talked with Bhutto's security adviser, who confirms reports I heard on BBC World Service:

Rehman Malik, Bhutto's security adviser, said she was shot in the neck and chest by the attacker, who then blew himself up.

Though, as noted in the next paragraph, some people question this story:

But Javed Iqbal Cheema, spokesman for the Interior Ministry, told state-run Pakistan Television that Bhutto died when a suicide bomber struck her vehicle. At least 20 others were killed in the blast, an Associated Press reporter at the scene saw.

Malik also discusses the jammers that Musharraf's government neglected to provide for Bhutto:

"We repeatedly informed the government to provide her proper security and appropriate equipment including jammers, but they paid no heed to our requests," Malik said.

Like I said before, the questiion of whether or not jammers would have helped might be elementary at this point -- if Bhutto was shot in the neck before the explosion, as reported by BBC World Service, then there's not much a jammer could have done about that. But the fact that Musharraf's government dragged their feet on Bhutto's security requests should be telling.

Bhutto's supporters got the message from Musharraf's government, apparently. The Independent article details their reaction after the attack:

As news of her death spread, supporters at the hospital in Rawalpindi smashed glass doors and stoned cars. Many chanted slogans against Musharraf, accusing him of complicity in her killing.

Angry supporters also took to the streets in the northwestern city of Peshawar as well as other areas, chanting slogans against Musharraf. In Rawalpindi, the site of the attack, Bhutto's supporters burned election posters from the ruling party and attacked police, who fled from the scene.

In Karachi, shop owners quickly closed their businesses as supporters from Bhutto's party burned tires on the roads. [...]

Some at the hospital began chanting, "Killer, Killer, Musharraf," referring to Musharraf, Bhutto's main political opponent. A few began stoning cars outside.

[Update 11:40] Last update for now as the mundanity normal life interludes: I must run to the laundrymat to wash clothes so I have something to wear at work tonight. (My boss hates it when I go in naked.) There wiill be no shortage of coverage about this story today from any news blog or service that you goto. Your best bets are The Newshoggers (for more "op/ed" type coverage -- much like you see here), Raw Story (which has a great run down of headlines on the frontpage), and TPM.

[Crossposted from Sugar Land is Dreaming.]

Quote of the Day

"Pakistanis from different walks of life here say that ever since President Pervez Musharraf imposed emergency rule two weeks ago, he's been the most unpopular figure in the country. But running a close second, many say, is his ally: President Bush."

Emily Wax and Imtiaz Ali, from their Washington Post article.

Bush's track record with sinking foreign leaders is impressive. Jose Maria Aznar and Tony Blair have both felt Bush's magical midas touch. It's no coincidence that neither of them are still in office.

"And the more I get to know President Putin, the more I get to see his heart and soul, and the more I know we can work together in a positive way," Bush said.

Putin's way of expressing his heart was allowing Russian weapons dealers to supply Saddam Hussein with weaponry. Putin was blamed for shuting down TV6. The station was critical of his policies.

Everything Bush touches turns to shit, including world leaders.

Comparing the ideologies of General Musharraf and Genre.. Err, excuse me, President Bush

Reading this blog post requires that you've paid attention to events in Central Asia over the weekend, but for those who haven't here's a quick overview: The Pakistani Supreme Court was set to rule on whether or not President Musharraf could run for reelection while still heading Pakistan's military. Additiionally, former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, who has recently returned to the country and wants a piece of the political pie (and has the clout to demand such) was out of the country, in Dubai on personal matters. General Musharraf then went apeshit, suspending the constitution and declaring martial law; also comparing himself to Abraham Lincoln, basically saying that he's a president trying to keep his country together. But unlike America's civil war, Musharraf claims that Pakistan is fighting terrorism.

Now, bringing us to my post, how exactly is terrorism defined? And where does a similariity between Bush and Musharraf's views come into play? The truth is scarier than you think:

Unlike Bush, Musharraf at least had the decency to announce to the whole world that he was placing the constitution "in abeyance" and arrogating all power to his sole person. The Bush administration prefers to promulgate shadowy memoranda, signing statements, and Humpty-Dumpty like amendments to the meaning of common words. Since the courts are instruments of terrorists (and can even be used to demoralize the security forces!) counter-terrorism logically requires the abolition of the rule of law.

Yeah, go you should read the whole thing.

[Crossposted from Sugar Land is Dreaming]