Friday December 28, 2007, 5:07 am
Osama bin Laden is Dead -Who murdered Benazir Bhutto? Murdered by intelligence agency
supported terrorists .When Benazir Bhutto returned to Pakistan to take a stand for democratic government, 3 million Pakistanis greeted her at the airport.Now she is dead.At 6:15 in this video, Benazir Bhutto refers in a matter-of-fact manner to "the man who killed Osama bin Laden."If this was a misstatement, she did not correct herself, nor did the interviewer call attention to it. Before she was murdered, there was another attack on Benazir Bhutto's life. She told David Frost that she was not even allowed to file a police report let alone get a serious investigation of the attack.

She specifically stated that she wanted the finances of the terrorists traced.

Saeed Sheikh is the man Bhutto refers to in this interview.

He is charged with killing Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl who tracked the relationship between Pakistani intelligence and terrorist groups. He is also suspected of having wired money to Mohamed Atta on behalf of Pakistani intelligence right before the 9/11 attacks.

George Bush & Company wholeheartedly support the current Pakistani regime.
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/242.html

Friday December 28, 2007, 5:26 am

I have got to admit it does all sound very, very `suspect`


However, and as I understand it (and have stated to others) even if Osama Bin Laden is dead, there ISN`T in fact any one group called al-qaeda. Such is merely a myth.
The words `al-qaeda` literally means `the base` - and is merely an umbrella under which many, many `groups` operate.


Also, (and change of topic here slightly) NOT all incidents involving al-qaeda even relate to the U.S.
Below, being one such incident :

http://www.care2.com/news/member/763717789/582445



What I also weigh up very very carefully are the Reports put out by IRAN MEDIA TV http://www.presstv.ir/
THESE ARE NOT A WESTERN `PUPPET` PRESS - yet they`ve regularly posted News Reports referring to al-qaeda.
Dont you think that if al-qaeda was nothing more than some CIA group that Iran would not have sussed that out by now and exposed it ????
I`m sure if they though al-qaeda was merely CIA, then Iran would have great delight in exposing it.


I`m not suggesting that the CIA are not running a group, under the pretence of being connected to al-quada - but it would certainly appear to be the case that there any many other legitimate groups out there which go under that al-qaeda umbrella name.

Friday December 28, 2007, 5:34 am
I agree, with the exception of the CIA definately being involved

Friday December 28, 2007, 6:04 am
Bush has been supporting the military regimie in Pakistan to have a landing base for his military, even withcries and huge protests from Pakinstani's themsevles (although there is/was a faction against Bhutto herself, some of the hatred on some of the blogs is mind boggling). He has never given Bhutto any concrete suppor, alot of talking. Pakistan is nuclear capable and has been since the late 80's
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/pakistan/nuke/index.html

Friday December 28, 2007, 6:05 am
Possible consequences of the assassination range from widespread street rioting by her followers to the nightmare scenario for Washington of Pakistan eventually becoming a nuclear-armed, unstable Islamic state.

Financial investors, who already factor in Pakistan's considerable political risk, said the killing itself was not surprising but that continuing instability would boost the risk.

Stephen Cohen of the Brookings Institution called Bhutto's death a "blow to the idea of a liberal, moderate Pakistan" that made him fear for that country.

"Its further decay will affect all of its neighbors, Europe, and the United States in unpredictable and unpleasant ways," the South Asia expert wrote in an essay.

"It is probably too late for the United States to do much either: we placed all of our bets on (President Pervez) Musharraf, ignoring Benazir's pleas for some contact or recognition until a few months ago," Cohen added.
http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN27406183

Friday December 28, 2007, 6:27 am

I`m not suggesting that the CIA havent got a group.
What`s to stop the CIA having a group & making out they are `allied to al-qaeda` ??? - nothing as far as I can see.

I was merely only making the point that there are other legitimate groups out there who are also allied & work under the umbrella name of al-qaeda.

Years ago when I used to be on aol (and just after 911) I did check out one day, out of curiosity, and came up with several links which listed ALL known terrorists groups & which ones were al-qaeda affiliated.
Of course, now, we would probably get `tracked` online if we tried to check that sort of info out, lol, so I`m not going to even try to get the link.

I`m just about to watch that video you posted.

Friday December 28, 2007, 6:55 am

hmmm.... that is certainly confirmation enough that OBL IS DEAD !!!!!!

Poor Mrs. Bhutto, there were obviously `some` out there who considered she knew too much, said too much, and quite tragically yesterday, it cost her `her life`

I just hope her party can hold it together, elect another leader who can carry on the work she was doing, and the work she carried on from her father.


Isn`t all this much the same though as all those Scientists, & microbiologists who were also `put down` because of their work, knowledge etc ? (including David Kelly - and also the B52 airmen who died in somewhat mysterious circumstances)

THE `TRUTH` IS A DANGEROUS GAME - and unfortunately those who speak out do put their lives on the line.
That is why leaders like Putin and Chavez are also now targets for assassination.

Ironically, the Bible states that in end days how people will HATE the Truth, REJECT the Truth in favour of false prophets. There are leaders out there who we could say fit that very description. They LIE through their back teeth - we need to look no further than how we came to be in Iraq !!!!!

The world is in a mess, and I hold out little hope of it getting better, until its had a severe shaking - one way or another. We need NEW leaders - the kind that Benazir Bhutto spoke about - and where there is no connection to financing terrorists so as to continue the wars & conflicts.

Friday December 28, 2007, 10:37 am
• The Bhutto attack occurred in Rawalpindi, home of a large military garrison, described by Peter Bergen today as akin to having an assassination occur right next to the Pentagon.

• The ties between the Pakistani military, the ISI (intelligence services) and radical Islamist groups like the Taliban are legion.

• Obviously, knocking off the top opposition leaders makes it easier to consolidate rule, as does a terror attack that could postpone elections or lead to a restoration of martial law.

So, while you can't exactly say Musharraf pulled the trigger on Bhutto, you might be able to make a case that he was at a family baptism at the time and may have smiled a bit hearing the news from Tom Hagen.

This, by the way, is our major ally in South Asia in the war on terror, someone who stood to benefit this much from a terrorist attack.

Friday December 28, 2007, 10:37 am
Usama bin Laden has been dead for some time. Once Bush and his corporate pirates could take Iraq and disrupt much of what stability was going on in the entire region. This is a classic CIA, NSA and World Bank tactic to create a vacuum and suck as much of the wealth of the area as they can control. We have been used to advance the terrorist agenda by careful orchestration by the government, media and the moneyed Elite to bring fearful compliance and conflicting images to confuse the populace. Make no mistake, we have been targeted for decades by the defense/security industries and, more recently, by the pharmaceutical corporations. We are offered medicines that create more problems than they ease, our food is contaminated, even our children and pets are in the crosshairs of these evil emperors. This is to cause so much emotional distress as to make us fearful for our own lives, making it easier to control as much of the citizenry as possible. Look into the history of the CIA and you'll discover very minimal direct action as an instrument of the corporate Elite. They use any crack in the stability of particular geo-political regions to instigate, incite or exhort rebellion against anything resembling a citizen-sponsored government, installing despots who carry on their warped campaigns to steal from the people, so they can control the region for their own interests.
It would take a long time to repair the damage done over decades simply because we got away from the community and the land. We were too busy to carry on a continuing desire to monitor what is going on around us and allowing others to make decisions that impact our lives directly. The only thing that makes "terrorism" work isn't the explosions, the kidnappings or the beheadings, it's that these images are played against our emotions to reduce the rationality of discernment. That's why Islam is the new "communism", soon to be supplanted by "homegrown terrorists" who threaten the so-called New World Order, an agenda begun long ago. If we could get back to the land, secure our food and teach our children the skills necessary to coexist, not only to compete, but to enhance the functionality of the continued community. Sounds like "hippies", doesn't it? Somehow, they were not wrong. They just couldn't extend the ideology to include vigilence, having become infiltrated by the same government which actually FEARS the People. Strictly speaking, we have become "the base", we who think and can see the lies and the crimes against our core. The worst we can do is succumb to that which the evil emperors would have us believe, that the world is out to get us. What they don't want you to see is that they are creating the conditions to make it happen. They WANT us to fear, they WANT us to be blinded to it (or numb to it) and, in that, they are no better than the terrorists they pretend to fight. Now, they want to demonize US, the ones who see through the lies, who speak out, and they're getting better at finding them every day.

Friday December 28, 2007, 10:41 am
Second sentence should read: Once Bush and his corporate pirates could take Iraq and disrupt much of what stability was going on in the entire region, bin Laden was of little consequence except as a distraction.

Friday December 28, 2007, 3:04 pm
Noted. She was a pawn and her death will be politically useful as well to advance the plans of the real terrorists among us. Thanks for bringing us this story, though it will need constant watching and cross-checking. Who can believe any press or any government anywhere? If you have nominees for that kind of trust, I would surely love to know who they are.

Friday December 28, 2007, 3:32 pm

Sadly noted as I really felt she was possibly Pakistan's greatest hope.

Friday December 28, 2007, 7:44 pm
Noted sadly.

Saturday December 29, 2007, 10:41 am

Blue Bunting (663) Thursday December 27, 2007, 12:22 pm
About three months ago, I wondered why
the US news media was obsessing about
Iran while entirely ignoring Pakistan.

Pakistan has operable nuclear weapons...
it is the home base of both the Taliban
and al Queda... and it's run by an anti-democratic
crook whose popular support is eroding daily.

Did I mention Bush backs him all the way
and sends the country billions to support
the "War on Terror?"

Three months later, the US news media
still has not presented a coherent overview
of the situation there.

So Brasschect TV will (again) thanks to
this video we found at Veracifier.

More treasonous incompetence on the part
of the Bush regime:

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/173.html