Intrigue Uncovered in Bhutto’s Murder

Is the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minster Benazhir Bhutto—whose Pakistan People’s Party was considered a shoe-in during the upcoming elections—yet another piece in the neocon puzzle aimed at further de-stabilizing the Islamic world and furthering the goal of perpetual war in the Middle East for Israel’s benefit?

Pakistan was immediately thrown into turmoil over the news of her death. The people were already incensed with President Pervez Musharraf, who was seen as a puppet for American and Zionist interests. They blamed him
for her death and named him the prime suspect.

Bhutto returned from an eight-year, self-imposed exile at the insistence of American operatives including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The bait in bringing her back to her native Pakistan was the elimination of corruption charges she was facing as well as assuring her a prominent place in an upcoming new Pakistani government.

With Musharraf’s unpopularity and the risk that the West would lose control over Pakistan, Bhutto’s return could douse the fires of a popular revolution as occurred in 1979 Iran. The main theme of her platform was “bringing democracy” and “fighting Islamic extremism” and in general making Pakistan a country cooperative with Western demands through her Pakistan People’s Party.

It is too early to assume this assassination is yet another false flag operation. But there are several items that can lead people to conclude her death at the hands of yet another “lone gunman” is all part of a bigger plan in furthering the neocon agenda in the Middle East.

De-stabilization of Islamic countries is the name of the game when it comes to the neocon agenda. Israeli oriented think tanks, groups and papers written such as “Clean-Break” and The New American Century speak openly of creating chaos in the region for the purpose of keeping Islamic countries divided and weak.

Pakistan, the lone Islamic country possessing nuclear weapons, is no exception. Like Iran and other Middle Eastern nations, Pakistan has remained recalcitrant toward normalizing relations with Israel and despite the relatively cooperative disposition of President Pervez Musharraf towards America, Pakistan still holds tight to the notion of her own sovereignty.

In addition, Pakistan—like Iraq—shares a long border with Iran that can be used as a forward base in any military attack on Iran, which has definitely not been taken off the neocon schedule.

Other items associated with the assassination raise suspicions among individuals aware of Zionism’s aims in the Middle East, not the least of which is the immediate pinning of this act on Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda.

Before the ambulance sirens had even died down, the sirens of the Zionist-dominated Western media were screeching out the standard mantra as if no other possibilities existed.

Next in terms of suspicious timing are the various news stories and op-eds preceding the assassination itself. Exactly one day before her death, a story appearing in the Washington Post entitled “U.S. Troops to Head
to Pakistan” reads in part:

“Beginning early next year, U.S. Special Forces are expected to vastly expand their presence in Pakistan as part of an effort to train and support indigenous counterinsurgency forces and clandestine counter-terrorism units, according to defense officials involved with the planning.”

Other stories appearing—interestingly enough—during the period of Bhutto’s campaigning and mega-media coverage, raised questions about the “safety” of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, said to number at least 70. In an op-ed piece appearing in the New York Times entitled “Pakistan’s Collapse, Our Problem” arch neocons Frederick Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute and Michael O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institute engage in the usual business of Zionist fear-mongering by warning that Pakistan’s security situation is dangerously precarious and that without a substantial presence of American troops there Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal will inevitably fall into the hands of “Islamists.”

Not trusting Pakistan’s security services, Bhutto sought protection from Israel’s Mossad and the CIA and warned that were she ever assassinated President Musharraf would be the “prime suspect.” In a recent interview with British television, she said Osama bin Laden is dead. The day after her assassination, SITE, a “monitoring service” run by two individuals closely tied with Israel’s Mossad (one of whom, Rita Katz, was herself an Israeli intelligence officer whose father was executed decades ago in Iraq for being an “Israeli spy”) released a new “bin Laden” video that somehow the best intelligence agencies in America could not seem to acquire with as much ease.

Bush & Co. would face problems if bin Laden’s death became common knowledge. The reason for the war would be lost and all those videos would be exposed as fraud.

Bhutto made statements just prior to her death that no doubt the powers-that-be found unacceptable in terms of the problems they portended in the future. In a recent piece she authored entitled “A False Choice for Pakistan,” Bhutto blamed terrorism on the policies of the United States, saying “When the United States aligns with dictatorships and totalitarian regimes, it compromises the basic democratic principles of its foundation—namely, life, liberty and justice for all.… Oppressed citizens, unable to represent themselves through other means, often turn to extremism and religious fundamentalism.”

In the last speech before her death, she said the insertion of NATO troops into Pakistan was unacceptable.

“Why should foreign troops come in? We can take care of this, I can take care of this, you can take care of this.”

People arguing that she was murdered because of her intransigence to American and Israeli interests have plenty of circumstantial evidence.

Mark Glenn