Benzair Bhutto Killed

Discussion in 'Politics & Law' started by Kazmarov, Dec 27, 2007.

  1. Kazmarov

    Kazmarov For a Free Scotland

    Pakistan Opposition Leader Bhutto Killed - World on The Huffington Post

    What's this spell for Pakistani democracy?

  2. pikatore

    pikatore Registered Member

    Pakistan has so much corruption and militant elements that I think that Bhutto would not be able to touch them. So me, and obviously to Pakistan, she has been iconic, a beacon of democracy, the embattled underdog taking on the tyrannical government. Unfortunately, that's all I think she would ever be able to do on her own. The PPP and those similarly aligned won't be able to topple Musharraf's regime, be it diplomatic or otherwise, and while extremists are in the woodwork, with things like religious schools, where people like them are churned out yearly, even Musharraf won't be able to retain control of the country. I believe Pakistan was dealt its deathblow long before this assassination, and I believe it should have gotten a lot more help from outside forces beforehand.

    Perhaps India can send some of it's forces in to help?
  3. RichardJ

    RichardJ Registered Member

    What would a multiculturist say?

    I don't mean to seem uncaring about Benazir Bhutto. Most Americans could take a lesson from her regarding political activism.

    My comment, rather, is about the culture that says a legitimate form of political strategy is to send a homicide bomber to kill your opponent. Here at home we Americans have made a grand production of being tolerant of all sorts of different cultures. We print our voting forms in more languages than I can count. We give different cultures all forms of sanctions and approvals to show that we are a "tolerant" society.

    We have never learned to say no to a cultural characteristic we don't approve of. We just ignore it and hope it won't interfere with our warm hugs and money give-aways. For example, we don't make an issue of the treatment of women in Muslim cultures. We don't make an issue of how the Chinese crack down on religious dissidents.

    Yesterday we saw how certain religious leaders deal with their political opposition in Pakistan. Life to them is rather cheap. Human rights are secondary to religious acquiescence. Infidels are relegated to second class citizenship. How do the multiculturists deal with the problem of a culture that does not respect our traditions of equality? When does tolerance stop and our values begin? Do we have the moral courage to face the zealots down and say there is line we will not cross? If we do, I haven't seen it.

  4. Jeanie

    Jeanie still nobody's bitch V.I.P. Lifetime

    Richard, I don't believe that it's "tolerance" that keeps us from interfering with the cultural practices of other countries. In fact the only time the US gets involved in the political affairs of other countries is when our own political and/or financial interests are at stake.

    Back to the topic at hand, this saddens me no end. I really admired her. I can't believe they killed her. :sigh:
  5. Kazmarov

    Kazmarov For a Free Scotland

    Pakistani-Indian relations suck out loud. They fought a war about ten years ago, and two before that.

    Nobody said this was okay, there have been fierce riots and protests against the act, the terrorists that are allegedly behind it, and the current government. Pakistan most definitely does not have a culture in which this is an accepted strategy. If we had Pakistan's security and instability, we'd have candidates killed just as often.

    In July Pakistan surrounded the Red Mosque and killed close to 100 fundamentalist students because they were kidnapping women who dressed liberally and storeowners that stocked supposedly inappropriate DVDs. Pakistan as a whole most definitely places human rights above religion, minus a fringe element that we ourselves have in the forum of Christian Identity members, white supremacists, and the Fred Phelps' of our nation.

    A women was a former prime minister and a leading opposition figure. We can't even boast that. I think their culture does and increasingly so respects equality.

    It's not our duty to make the world abide by our moral compass. If we tried to, we'd just radicalize more people.
  6. pikatore

    pikatore Registered Member

    Re: What would a multiculturist say?

    When it comes to drawing lots of lines for other countries and organisations, I think America has done quite enough.

    There are a hundred and one ways to deal with an organisation hell bent on destroying infidels (this ideology has it's origins). Bombing the crap out of them is but one of those ways.
  7. RichardJ

    RichardJ Registered Member

    You make a some good points. But I hear an amateur lawyer trying to explain away the forest one tree at a time. I'm not advocating trying to change anyone. My point is very simply we shouldn't accept a foreign culture just because it's a "foreign culture". We have every right to accept or reject cultural standards based on behavior.

    Security and instability don't murder political candidates, people do. And I beg to differ. At least one person said murdering a political opponent was ok, but he blew himself up. So we can't ask him how many like minded friends helped him. But I suspect there was more than one.

    I have never been to Pakistan and I suspect neither have you. So I doubt you can say they "most definitely" put human rights above religion. We can only make our judgments from the Pakistanis' own actions. The Red Mosque is a religious icon in Islamabad. Thousands of students attend their religious training. What does it say about Islam that a famous mosque in a nation's capital kidnaps people for religious crimes? You might have a point if the mosque had been in some remote region.

    Who is Nancy Pelosi?

    Of course it isn't our duty to convert the world to our culture. Neither is it our duty to blindly accept any culture and its values. I feel it is perfectly acceptable to impose a litmus test on anyone coming from a Muslim area or who practices Islam. We don't have to assume these people are fair minded and law abiding. It's only common sense to see that Muslim countries produce some of the most violent religious zealots in the world. Why not put restrictions on their involvement in our society until they can prove they don't harbor violent attitudes against us?

    The Mormons and Scientologists have been very calm and law abiding for the past few decades. But if they did start murdering presidential candidates I don't see why we shouldn't put restrictions on them also. That goes for Christians, Jews, Texans, and left handed midgets as well.

  8. Colt

    Colt Registered Member

    She was very corrupt like her father and most if not all political leaders there.
    Her father was hung in 1979 and she was jailed at the same time while she was running for parliament. She was considered by those in the Sindh province as a great envisioner. She was twice prime minister and justifiably was under suspicion of financial corruption and incompetence. She spent alot of years in exile in London. After returning this past October her promises of democracy were shunned by many as they have heard her words before. She is said by many to believe she was above all others and simply deserved more than all others. I heard one authority say she now felt she was "God-like" and could not be killed. Perhaps that is the reason she decided to stand up in the bullet proof car exposing herself. Ironic because even the Pope drives around fully surrouned by bullet proof glass. I guess you could say he is a tad bit smarter and more humble than Bhutto was.
  9. pikatore

    pikatore Registered Member

    She was an icon of democracy in a primitive, almost tribalised society, and was also a beacon of modernity, showing that a Muslim girl CAN be a giant in a chosen field. Despite all the flaws she may have, let us remember that.
  10. mermaidboy

    mermaidboy Registered Member

    I cannot help but feel Bhutto was at fault in her own demise. She was a very courageous in being outspoken about democracy in a tightly controlled regime; perhaps foolishly so. Her outspokenness and frequent public appearances made her a prime and easy target.
    With the recent news that Bhutto's 19-year-old son is to be her successor and new head of her party, I fear that democracy may be put on hold should he run in elections, since Bhutto's son is young and may be considered inexperienced. I did, however, see him speak on CNN and he is quite eloquent.

Share This Page