once again, the bbc is on top of the story. TWO DAYS ago, there was a video shown, from behind the vehicle, that clearly shows the bomber, in white, the shooter, in black, clean shaven, the gun-fire, her hair and veil lifted by the bullet entering her skull, her falling, dead, into the truck, as the bomb explodes. where is this video on OUR tv?
update:musharraf saying the new accounts,
new video, new evidence, should be looked at by experts...inviting and accepted scotland yard, etc. we'll see.

check the kerning.

It takes many revisions to get to the truth

Theory #2985654:

1. Gunman shoots Bhutto.

2. Suicide bomber kills eye-witnesses.

3. Police destroy the evidence.

What the plotters evidently failed to learn from JFK is that when there's a Zapruder, it'll decimate your lone headbutt on the open sunroof theory.

I wonder what our Government's official insistence would be given the assassination of Hillary or Obama or Edwards two weeks before the election?

I'm of little doubt they would insist it was Al Queda, even if there was widely circulated video of an angry dittohead doing the deed.

The fact that the Pak government made a 'clumsy' effort to handle PR (using their rationale for findings) and the videos that have been released, leave us all wondering, should we trust our lying eyes or drink the koolaid?

That said, the impression that I get is that both sides like the circumstance where it stands, opponents of Bhutto's party satisfied she is dead and that the vote is delayed, and little progress in following any real leads in the investigation of her murder, and the Bhutto faction liking Musharef taking the heat for the images in the video and the assumptions based on historical pakistan fact that this is how that government transitions power.

There is also no direct evidence to date that Musharef was party to the assasination attempt, instead 10% of graft, political patronage, and 10 billion in US aid leaves open the possibility that finding a true-believer, honor killing vendetta individual (tribal/personal get even with Bhutto), or even a terminally ill or 'believed to be terminally ill' man in white, coupled with a man in sunglasses whom probably thought the pistol handed to him, and the murder attempt, would result in him escaping jail or house arrest, while a third shooter had a better success if they knew that bhutto would have her head outside the sunroom of the car, in that respect.. sticking her head through the sunroof was the 'cause of death' as she got injured doing that. Maybe that was lost in translation??? Laughing...

I can't see why two grenades were not held up by hand, or, a formed explosive was not used on the car, or why a handgun was used if she was wearing body armor.

I saw the movie the kingdom this weekend, and it was entertaining, and I thought on some levels how it was similar in theme to Bhutto's assasination.

But one damn thing is certain, if bhutto was not in charge of the assasination, and that level of assasination can occur, then the question is who is in charge?

And that question is the answer to the question, who benefits?

And that in patronage assignments and Pakistan politics makes for a list that even scotland yard and the FBI will need a snicker bar to work on.

I still think the shot to her shoulder was not the shot that killed her and that body armor displaced that round, and that a second shot (according to accounts initially released hit her in the neck and tumbled down her torso and created the cardiac failure and exited her abdomen.

Either that was one lucky ass asssasian, who managed a head shot shooting from below and behind a armored vehicle, getting a hit despite level III or level IV body armor, or there was another conspirator with a rifle to defeat that protection.

And then the armored vehicle, buckshot damage, when a formed projectile (monroe effect) would have done the job.

Either we must believe that there was a crime of opportunity as a suicide bomber and his 'boy friend' with a pistol lurked by... defeating security, armored vehicle, and armor vest, or we believe that the doorknob did it, (the lying eyes theory), or we assume that the hit was organized beyond two and that a third actor or conspirator fired the shot.

Remember it takes only one true-believer or terminally ill patient with a grudge...

we know we have two or suspect so...

and the video suggests that there was three.

but there is no direct tie to musharaf, and as the kingdom movie stated, 'treason is only acceptable when it is palatable' and I might add.. done with more grace than an ape dancing in hip boots.

musharaf oughta be serious about an investigation, if not there is a genuine question of whom is in charge or if he can remaon so...

there needs to be a more palatable explanation than your lying eyes...

The best summary I've seen so far was from the Rude Pundit. Paraphrasing:

Either a) Musharraf didn't know in advance that this assassination was going to take place, or b) he did. If a), then he's the worst kind of dictator, one who isn't really in control of his country. If b), then he's a typical dictator.

Good story here, from Dec. 13th, on the backstory of USA reasons for Bhutto and Musharrf to work together, actually.
Reports a lot on her background of corruption.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n24/ali_01_.html

Even if it turns out that Musharraf had absolutely nothing to do with it, I bet he's still not losing any sleep at night, crying over it.....

Missing Evidence from Bhutto's Murder
Monday, Dec. 31, 2007 By ARYN BAKER AND SIMON ROBINSON/ISLAMABAD

Time Magazine summed it up in the last paragraph in the above article, they used the word 'cynical' to aproximate the eastern mindset...

But the reporting was accurate, and explains why the circumstances evolved to where they did.

(from the article)
...

And then there is the cynical view. In some ways, the lack of a definitive answer suits all sides. The government can maintain its story that an al-Qaeda suicide bomb plot killed Bhutto, thus exonerating itself from negligence at best and complicity at worst. Meanwhile the PPP can leverage the insinuation of government culpability to keep Bhutto's death relevant as Pakistan prepares for the elections she died campaigning for.

....

The eastern mindset, its the will of God, or it is karma, is a capitulation of sorts.. it is a 'common denominator' world view. Westerners see alternatives, see opportunity, seek an answer to why it wssn't done such... the eastern mind works under the assumption that the world is a dark place, and that things are as they are.

A western analysis would term that worldview 'cynical' while the pakistan/hindu culture would view that as 'pragmatic.'

I found it interesting to watch this unfold, and have a background in communication arts and philosophy. I think that I have not witnessed a larger gaffe than when: Ahmadinejad... "There are no homosexuals in Iran!"...

But the world view of Pakistan is indeed 'cynical' as much as Mexico was once described as Mañana, and that meant that western presumptions did not apply, similar to when a 'yes but' in eastern culture ='s a firm 'NO.' A negotiation that is made as an assertion, and then received with, a 'yes but' is not an acknowledgement of your point of view, but instead culturally a language that has not the word 'no!'

Yep, ipso facto, all transitions of power in Pakistan have been made with exiles, assasinations, and coup. From a cynical standpoint, conventional wisdom would hold that all but the village idiot did not take the cynical attitude.

Time magazine did the best analysis as they captured the 'zeitgeist' (a western concept) of the Pakistan circumstances.