If you have "no place to go," come here!

Parallel of the Martyrs

Sarah's picture

Something's horribly wrong in Pakistan,
with the Bhutto killing.

Not just the killing, but the twisting and turning of the mechanism of her death -- an effort to deny her martyrdom? -- and then there's the gaping hole around the identity of the gunman/suicide bomber. "Al Qaeda" isn't a name, or even an identifier like, say, "Palestinian" or "Mossad" or "Agency." Al Qaeda is like "on condition of anonymity".

Martyrs. What is it about them that compels us to

reinvestigate every detail of their demise with the attention to detail of a professional crime scene investigator?

What is it that draws us back,

time and again, into the shadows and uncertainties,

and makes of us not merely observers,

but borderline conspiracy theorists?

Well -- to start with, there's the astounding amount of "evidence," officially "vetted" and announced or released or publicized or however you want to look at that process.


I can tell you what made me think Lee Harvey Oswald wasn't the only guy involved in killing Jack Kennedy: it was Jack Ruby, getting into the Dallas PD basement with a gun in his waistband and blowing Oswald apart in front of the cameras, three days after that horrible motorcade.


Why would Ruby do that? Not because Ruby was a sane man, or a vengeant man. Because somebody had to be sure Oswald didn't tell -- whatever it was Oswald knew, or maybe didn't know that he should have known, would have had to know, to be a lone assassin in Dallas.

So, how come we don't have a minute-by-minute account of that one "Al Qaeda" suicidal assassin's life, already? How come we don't know where that one shooter, who wore a bomb, was born, grew up, became embittered, learned to hate either the Pakistani government, Bhutto, or both, trained as a suicide bomber / killer, bought the components for the bomb and the gun and the bullets?

Or is there something else going on here, something under the surface?

It's connection enough, I guess, that the people who were killed represented a threat -- to who, or what, or how, we don't know yet.

But I wonder, now, if any of it's connected to the "business coup" Smedley Butler refused to lead against FDR.

No votes yet


kelley b's picture
Submitted by kelley b on

In Bhutto's case, like the others you depict, the more you look at it, the curiouser it gets.

The events around 9/11 have a similar fractal aura about them.

It's not paranoid to realize the official stories are full of holes.

Just realize that you can never really know the facts- but the old standbys of motive, opportunity, and financial gain remain the best standards of evidence.

Nice post Sarah.

No Hell below us
Above us, only sky

...if we get all our info from cable and network news.

You might have heard some mention about how Bhutto's previous attempts at governance were plagued by corruption. I just though I'd offer this letter by her niece as another perspective on the matter:

As usual, there is more than meets the lazy corporate media eye. As with the Hariri assassination in Lebanon, the more you know about the target, the more complicated the picture gets.

Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

Channel 4 in Britain has footage that must have been shot from the follow vehicle in Bhutto's convoy that ID's the gunman, ID's the bomber - an individual separate from the gunman, and clearly demonstrates that gunshots were the cause of death.

This was a coordinated op that smells like ISI ...

Video link at Talking Points Memo: