December 27, 2007, - 11:34 am
Karma: Terrorism-Supporter Bhutto Was No Saint . . . And “Jimmy Carter” Bush Moves Predicated This Outcome
By Debbie Schlussel
**** UPDATE: READ about St. Benazir’s conviction for kickbacks and money laundering in a Swiss Court, her support for Arafat, her recognition of and support for the Taliban, and her own niece’s L.A. Times Op-Ed piece calling her a liar. ****
Trite, but true: What comes around goes around. And today’s assassination of Benazir Bhutto is a bit of both for her and for George W. Bush’s deliberate, destabilizing “democracy” policy in Pakistan and the rest of the Mid-East.
While the whole world (yes, including plenty of ignorant conservatives) is hailing the late Benazir Bhutto–in the wake of her assassination, this morning–as some sort of saint and would-be messiah of Pakistan, let’s be clear: She was neither saint nor savioress. Closer to the opposite, in fact. And her death is not a loss for America. It is a step back from Bush’s failed “democracy” plan for destabilizing a ally-dictator who defied Islamists to publicly support America.
The “moderate” Bhutto was actually a Saudi-backed, anti-Semitic, pro-Palestinian-terrorism force of instability, anarchy, and protest in Pakistan. Her return to Paki politics would only divide and conquer pro-U.S. forces in the country, allowing the more popular Islamists to dominate. That she was assassinated was not a good thing, especially since the U.S. made the mistake of backing her and forcing her on Musharraf. But that she is now gone from Pakistani politics is a positive development in a myriad of ways.
The George W. Bush-orchestrated move of returning Bhutto to Pakistan from exile in the Gulf was a bad move on so many levels. It echoes the Jimmy Carter era of ushering out the pro-U.S. Shah of Iran and ushering in the never-ending Ayatollah Khomeini/Mahmoud Ahmadinejad era. This time around, Bhutto’s opposition to Musharraf would have ushered out a pro-U.S. dictator, Pervez Musharraf, and ushered in Islamist chaos, HAMASastan-style.
True, Musharraf is not exactly the greatest counter-terrorist. He came to office in a coup, and he comes from atop an army dominated by the pro-Al-Qaeda I.S.I. He may even be protecting the whereabouts of Bin Laden and isn’t the greatest ally of the U.S.. But he is not the worst, either, and he is far better than the alternative, including the would-be now-late Bhutto. Without Musharraf atop the country, it will revert to the natural state of what really is Greater Barbaria bubbling beneath the entire Islamic and Arab worlds. If you liked the Daniel Pearl beheading and dismemberment in Karachi, you’d love Pakistan under a short-lived Bhutto return and long-lived post-Bhutto Iran, er . . . Pakistan.
One Khalid Sheikh Mohammed running free through the streets of Pakistan, plotting murders of thousands of Americans? Under a Bhutto, or post-Bhutto overthrow revolutionary “government” in Pakistan, the country would be overrun with them, and they’d be running the country.
George Bush had no business demanding the free return of Bhutto to Pakistan and demanding free elections in this barbaric microcosm of Greater Islamia. Did Bush/Condi Clueless really expect a different result than the zoo-states he created with elections in Gaza, Hezbollah-stan, Muslim Brotherhood Nation (formerly Egypt), etc? Bush created riots and mayhem and chaos in Pakistan by doing so and destabilized the very man on whom he depended as a Muslim ally in the largely unsuccessful “War on Terror.” If this is how Bush treats our lukewarm Muslim allies–by laying out the blueprints for their demise–then, few will support us.
Bhutto, in the end, was really no different than Musharraf (though far less strong a leader and incapable of being the tough dictator necessary for that country), and–even had she won the election and ruled the country–could afford to be no different. And she was no different. Not long after 9/11, she made the rounds on Sunday political TV shows (including NBC’s “Meet the Press”), uttering the same extremist platitudes against Israel and the Jews to even the amazement of the hosts (including Tim Russert). Ditto for her repeated pronouncements justifying and defending Palestinian homicide bombings against innocent civilians. Today’s events were a bit of karma for Ms. Bhutto.
An Arafat-fan, Bhutto and her criminal husband were largely kept people by the Saudis and the United Arab Emirates. They owed the Gulf States, big-time. Not only was her husband was a crook, but she, in many other ways, was a fraud. She could not hold onto power the first time. With Pakistan much less stable, why on earth would we usher out the mild U.S. ally Musharraf to give her the chance a second time in far more rough waters. If you like Iran, you’d love the second post-Bhutto Pakistan.
So, while I’m sorry to see a U.S.-backed opposition leader (whom Bush made the mistake of backing) go out in an explosion of non-glory, the loss of Bhutto is no loss at all. It is actually a good thing for the U.S., despite Bush’s attempts to usher out Musharraf the way Jimmy Carter ushered out the pro-U.S. Shah . . . and usher in greater Islamic extremism in the name of his silly “democracy” experiment.
Bush’s “democracy” has failed in Gaza, Lebanon (where Hezbollah gained seats and key government ministries), Egypt (where the Muslim Brotherhood gained seats), and everywhere else it’s been tried. Gone to supersecret Mass in Iraq, lately? Democracy will fail in Pakistan, too.
Make no mistake. Benazir Bhutto’s death is no loss for American interests. Her reinsertion into Pakistan by our country was the problem. And she was no savioress. Not even close.
Remember, just because a Muslim has a pretty face, it doesn’t make her a moderate.
Tags: al-Qaeda, America, Benazir Bhutto, bin Laden, counter-terrorist, Debbie Schlussel, Egypt, Gaza, George W. Bush, Hizballah, Iraq, Islamic Republic of Iran, Israel, Jimmy Carter, Karachi, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Lebanon, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Massachusetts, Muslim Brotherhood, NBC, opposition leader, Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf, Swiss Court, Taliban, Tim Russert, United Arab Emirates, United States
Debbie,
Thank you for this reality check, it’s very important in the face of all of this morning’s sadness that ‘a poor woman was murdered’. There’s Far more to it than that, but that’s as far as many of us go, only seeing the face of it.
Bosch Fawstin on December 27, 2007 at 12:11 pm