Benazir Bhutto Assassinated

[Malice]

Wow....

Is there anyone who knows Pakastani politics and the state of the country that can give us more info of what its like there...something we dont get from CNN...
I am really curious.

[Super_Ludacris]

This is pretty bad, considering she was the only clear oppostion leader in the elections. She wasnt a great Prime Minister back in the 80s and 90s (from my pakistani friend has told me about politics there. But I suppose that depends on a political stance).
She narrowly escapped a suicide bombing in October. This is very bad for Pakistan which is clearly divided.
I just realise a good friend of mine was in Lahore. I hope hes ok, I know Bhutto was a major political figure with support and I just hope theres no rioting in the streets or anything. But there probably.

All I know is Nawaz Sharif aint gonna think about going back there now....

[November Rain]

I'm not aware i currently heard about this on the tv, apparently they shot her a couple of times and then some dude came in and blowed her and himself up.

They were really out to get her, it was only a matter of time before they got her i think

Shame

[rdh007]

I don't think this bodes well. A nuclear state is destabilized and that ain't cool.

[Super_Ludacris]

I'm not aware i currently heard about this on the tv, apparently they shot her a couple of times and then some dude came in and blowed her and himself up.

They were really out to get her, it was only a matter of time before they got her i think

Shame

QFT

[SuBe]

This is a real shame.

[Super_Ludacris]

Actually let me correct myself, Sharif is already back in Pakistan. But he was leading the opposing party to Bhutto in the upcoming elections.Obviously he's in a good position until they find a replacment for the election if at all


Dude is a dead man walking at this point....

[kane9321]

this is so sad..fn savages

[Red Mask]

This is truly tragic. Despite the charges of corruption Bhutto did not deserve such a cowardly attack. We mourned the death of Capt. America this year, but a real life promoter of democracy and peace has been killed today. This hasn't been a great year for democracy.

[chamber-music]

Can't believe she got killed. Just saw Benazir Bhutto story on CNN. This is really bad news for Pakistan and the region in general.

[Mee]

We mourned the death of Capt. America this year, but a real life promoter of democracy and peace has been killed today. This hasn't been a great year for democracy.
Hahaha


But yeah, sad stuff. :csad:

[Super_Ludacris]

To be honest, she was lucky she survived the first, that killed 130 of her supporters back in October.

This really throws the political ramifcations of the next election in Pakistan in a loop. Does anyone know if Imran Khan is still seriously thinking about running?

[Wilhelm-Scream]

This is just like Benigno Aquino. I've been watching her on PBS and CNN, and every time I saw her speak, I thought, "Okay, she's going to be assassinated." and everyone knows it, but they bravely go on anyway, until, they're killed.

[terry78]

When you're in the public eye like that and have opinions that aren't popular, you will be a target. You can go with the safe route, but then we wouldn't have the progress we do now. I'm waiting to see what some of the prez candidates have to say about this now and how it will relate to their own agendas.

[Super_Ludacris]

This really hurts Musharaf.

It was understood that her party would win the elections and that her and Musharraf would share power. He needed her for international and local legitmacy.

Like I said she wasnt a great PM back in the day and from the Pakistanis I've spoken to some viewed her as a step foward in the political process and others viewed her as being corupt as the rest from her past record.

Still, kinda crazy she got cap and the pictures are pretty graphic

http://www.gettyimages.com/Search/Search.aspx?EventId=78622741#

[terry78]

When you see those and can put a face to it, it starts to resonate more because it happened so recent.

[chamber-music]

To be honest, she was lucky she survived the first, that killed 130 of her supporters back in October.

This really throws the political ramifcations of the next election in Pakistan in a loop. Does anyone know if Imran Khan is still seriously thinking about running?

I hope Imran Khan does run. We need people to prove democaracy does work and people won't be bullied or murdered into a dictatorship.

Its worth the risk even if the price is so high. Bhutto knew that.

[Super_Ludacris]

I hope Imran Khan does run. We need people to prove democaracy does work and people won't be bullied or murdered into a dictatorship.

Its worth the risk even if the price is so high. Bhutto knew that.

Living here in the US, I dont know too much about him but from I hear dude was like a big Cricket star turn celeb/humanatarian/aspiring politican.

I'm saying what can he do?

Bhutto's family was always in political conflict (setting up the Islamic republic etc), I dont know if dude is built for that.

[PhotoJones]

Bhutto was falsely accused and never charged for allegations of corruption. She went into exile and recently returned to work to bring democracy and women's rights to Pakistan, as well as an end to state-backed terrorism. She was someone who could have brought about serious change, and not just in Pakistan.

For anyone interested, NPR still has interviews they did with her from a few weeks back.

[StorminNorman]

A horrible, horrible tragedy whose shockwaves will be felt worldwide.

Pakistan is tearing itself apart right now. A nuclear country destroying itself from inside.

Things in the world have just gotten a lot darker.

[Spider-Man Luvr28]

They're talkin about it now on CBS. Says it was a suicide attack.

[Super_Ludacris]

Bhutto was falsely accused and never charged for allegations of corruption. She went into exile and recently returned to work to bring democracy and women's rights to Pakistan, as well as an end to state-backed terrorism. She was someone who could have brought about serious change, and not just in Pakistan.

For anyone interested, NPR still has interviews they did with her from a few weeks back.

I wonder if a lot of resentment is directed to her family for being involved in creating an Islamic Republic? I need to know more about it to be sure...

[Super_Ludacris]

smh@ George Bush...

Im watching the news conference live on TV of him giving his condolences to Bhutto's family and the people of Pakistan and he just referred to her as Mr Bhutto......


an idiot through and through

[Poeman]

it was a headshot...and i can tell you, its gonna be absolute hell in pakistan for the upcoming future.

right now there are probably insane riots

[Super_Ludacris]

Nawaz Shareef on TV right now if anyone got CNN or BBC World Service news

[chamber-music]

I hope we get some elections soon because Nawaz Sharif is losing power and they don't have someone keeping the country together its gonna turn into Iraq with all the different pakistani leaders fighting for power.

[PhotoJones]

I wonder if a lot of resentment is directed to her family for being involved in creating an Islamic Republic? I need to know more about it to be sure...

Probably not. The resentment towards her comes from the fact that she puts women and men as equals, which is something a lot of men can't handle.

[sinewave]

terrible tragedy. i'm guessing they'll revert back to a state of emergency any minute now.

[PhotoJones]

Or civil war.

[Super_Ludacris]

Probably not. The resentment towards her comes from the fact that she puts women and men as equals, which is something a lot of men can't handle.

?

I dont think thats the reason at all seeing as most women in Pakistan can get jobs and equal positions in Pakistan (shoot, she was a 2 term Prime Minister).

[PhotoJones]

?

I dont think thats the reason at all seeing as most women in Pakistan can get jobs and equal positions in Pakistan (shoot, she was a 2 term Prime Minister).

I wasn't talking about jobs, and neither was Bhutto. She worked for social reform, including programs and development banks specifically for women, which is something Pakistan lacked and is still lacking.

[raybia]

I wasn't talking about jobs, and neither was Bhutto. She worked for social reform, including programs and development banks specifically for women, which is something Pakistan lacked and is still lacking.

She was not assassinated because of that. It was because her goal was to help establish Pakistan into a true democracy and not be a puppet Government who answers to the whims of the West.

#1 Suspect is Musharif and those who support and maintain his rule.

[kainedamo]

I'm thinking it was definately a government sponsered/backed assassination.

Its the second time they tried to assassinate her in as many months.

[Apollo]

thats horrible news :csad:

i was watching her on the Nightly news a few weeks ago.

[raybia]

I'm thinking it was definately a government sponsered/backed assassination.

Its the second time they tried to assassinate her in as many months.


Nawaz Sharif holds Musharraf responsible for Bhutto killing

Nawaz Sharif, another former prime minister of Pakistan, on Thursday held President Pervez Musharraf "responsible" for the assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto during an election rally in Rawalpindi and said any inquiry should be conducted only after he steps down.

"Pervez Musharraf is responsible and accountable for what happened today," Sharif told a private news channel in an interview.

"I hold his policies responsible for landing this country into the terrible mess," a shaken Sharif said.

"Nobody has confidence in Musharraf. Everybody wants him to step down and hold the inquiry (into Benazir's death)," he said.

Recollecting his recent interactions with Bhutto, Sharif said: "We had a good rapport, although we were rivals. She, in fact, called me on December 25 to wish me on my birthday. She personally called me and sent bouquets for me. She always came up as a warm and pleasant person."

Sharif said Bhutto had come down to Jeddah when he was in exile and later decided to work together to reinstate democracy in Pakistan. "We had a long meeting - four-hours long meeting -- and we decided to agree upon a common charter of democracy."

"We both felt that the army had no role in politics because she was also the victim of army's intervention and so am I. There was so much in common between us. We were struggling for the restoration of the rule of law," he told the television channel adding that there were plans for a joint strategy and seat adjustments between them.

Bhutto, 54, was killed in a suicide attack after an election rally in Rawalpindi. At least 30 of her Pakistan People's Party (PPP) workers were also killed in the terror attack.

Earlier, Sharif told Bhutto supporters outside the General Hospital in Rawalpindi that he would join hands with the PPP and fight their "war".
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print.aspx?Id=a27beda0-2b73-4731-98bc-8ad28d35a423
© Copyright 2007 Hindustan Times




Elements of Musharraf's Government; the army and intelligence service would have stood to lose money and power if she had become Prime Minister.

Ms Bhutto's London spokesperson, Wajid Hassan, said: "The problem is the (Pakistan) government has failed to provide security.

"They seem to be half-hearted in providing protection to opposition parties. As far as their own parties are concerned they have been very meticulous."

[raybia]

No surprise that its being reported that the country's January 8 elections would now "most likely be postponed or cancelled".

This is of course exactly what Musharraf wanted to do in the first place when he declared a state of emergency and martial law recently.

Obviously this turn of events conveniently plays right into his hands.

[PhotoJones]

She was not assassinated because of that. It was because her goal was to help establish Pakistan into a true democracy and not be a puppet Government who answers to the whims of the West.

#1 Suspect is Musharif and those who support and maintain his rule.

Did I say that's why she was assassinated? No. I said that's why a lot of Pakistanis hold have a resentment towards her.

[Lackey]

according to who?

[raybia]

Did I say that's why she was assassinated? No. I said that's why a lot of Pakistanis hold have a resentment towards her.

A lot of Pakistanis hold resentment towards her? :huh:

Yeah, Musharraf, those in his Government and his supporters who are benefiting from his dictatorial rule.

The common people of Pakistan, the masses loved this woman because it was her who was trying to change the country into a place that would be beneficial them.

[chamber-music]

She wanted to stop the islamic extreamists who use the remote parts of country as a training ground and recruitment centre. They would have just as much reason to kill her as Musharraf or others.

The fact of the matter is she had many enemies in her own country. Her farther the former prime minister was toppled and hanged by his own military. The Bhutto family don't seem to have much luck.

I feel sorry for her two teenage children who no longer have a mother.

[raybia]

She wanted to stop the islamic extreamists who use the remote parts of country as a training ground and recruitment centre. They would have just as much reason to kill her as Musharraf or others.

But the problem is that they didn't kill Musharraf. They killed Bhutto. As a supposed ally to the U.S. for the war on terror Musharraf is supposed to also stop the Islamic extremists in this region of the country. He is more their ally since he is allowing them a safe haven.

Who would be willing to remove the thorn that Bhutto proved to be from Musharraf than these extremist?


The fact of the matter is she had many enemies in her own country. Her farther the former prime minister was toppled and hanged by his own military. The Bhutto family don't seem to have much luck.

Yes she had enemies but that doesn't warrant the statement that "Pakistanis resented Bhutto." The masses loved her. Do you think that possible Civil War in Pakistan would even be discussed in a country that supposedly resented her? There is absolutely no truth to this ridiculous claim.

Forget who pulled the trigger. She was killed by the Government.



I feel sorry for her two teenage children who no longer have a mother.

The human element is what is being left out.

[Dark Vigilante]

The assassination of Bhutto is far too convenient for President Musarraf. Last November, Musharraf suspended the Pakistani constitution, and arrested political dissedents, humans rights activists, and the very Supreme Court justices that were questioning the validity of his "re-election" in October. In fact, the growing insurgency exists because of the Pakistani people's disdain for Musharraf's dictatorship.

Eventually, after facing pressure internationally, and internally, Musharraf allowed Bhutto back into the country. As soon as it became clear that she would win in an election, she was killed. And now, Musharraf and of course, Bush, are blaming it on Islamic terrorists, basically the insurgency that is opposing Musharraf. By killing Bhutto, and blaming it on terrorists, Musharraf has killed two birds with one stone. He kills his political rival, and then uses her death to galvanize the Pakistani people to take action against the growing insurgency against him.

I'm not saying this is whats happening, but it's certainly something to be aware of and consider. I refuse to believe what I see on television anymore. Come to your own conclusions.

[Superman]

This could get ugly.:wow:

[Genesis 1.0]

The assassination of Bhutto is far too convenient for President Musarraf. Last November, Musharraf suspended the Pakistani constitution, and arrested political dissedents, humans rights activists, and the very Supreme Court justices that were questioning the validity of his "re-election" in October. In fact, the growing insurgency exists because of the Pakistani people's disdain for Musharraf's dictatorship.

Eventually, after facing pressure internationally, and internally, Musharraf allowed Bhutto back into the country. As soon as it became clear that she would win in an election, she was killed. And now, Musharraf and of course, Bush, are blaming it on Islamic terrorists, basically the insurgency that is opposing Musharraf. By killing Bhutto, and blaming it on terrorists, Musharraf has killed two birds with one stone. He kills his political rival, and then uses her death to galvanize the Pakistani people to take action against the growing insurgency against him.

I'm not saying this is whats happening, but it's certainly something to be aware of and consider. I refuse to believe what I see on television anymore. Come to your own conclusions.

The problem with that statement is that unless you're there at the scene, your only real medium for getting news is television or the internet, both of which are rank with bias. Some which lay the blame on extermist and others which are aired on private networks that blame Musharraf, i.e. Nawaz Sharif. Unfortunately it's nearly impossible to get a straight story.

Drawing conclusions consists of drawing whatever information you can from what you see and whatever other corraborating evidence you can find, and simply hope the information you're basing it on isn't corrupt. Getting the 'news' is becoming more of a meticulous judiciary process than anything.

[PhotoJones]

A lot of Pakistanis hold resentment towards her? :huh:

Yeah, Musharraf, those in his Government and his supporters who are benefiting from his dictatorial rule.

The common people of Pakistan, the masses loved this woman because it was her who was trying to change the country into a place that would be beneficial them.

Yes, a lot of Pakistanis held a resentment towards her. You yourself just mentioned who those people are: Musharraf, the military and the supporters of both.

What is so hard to understand about this?

[Genesis 1.0]

The easy route now is to of course blame the idiot who's managed to dig this hole: Musharraf. It's not right but he only has himself to blame. It's already started to hit the fan.

[Super_Ludacris]

Dont forget Musharaff needed someone like Bhutto to appease the west and work with, I dont know if he would do that.

[Genesis 1.0]

Dont forget Musharaff needed someone like Bhutto to appease the west and work with, I dont know if he would do that.

Exactly. I wouldn't go so far as to call her anyone's figurehead, but she would have definitely put a more appealing face on Pakistan, one that Musharraf had when he was still the People's Champion and lost subsequently.

[Super_Ludacris]

True indeed. Why would do something that does more damage for his reign? Like I said, he is the one at a disadvantage from this happening.

[Genesis 1.0]

This is true but it's rather hard to find any pity for the man when, as I said, he dug this hole faithfully. Hell, anything that went wrong was bound to be blamed on him at this point, whether he had any hand or not. Guess he and President Bush should share some true kinship about now.

I imagine the same would happen if Hilalry were asassinated.

[PhotoJones]

I imagine the same would happen if Hilalry were asassinated.

How is that? I don't hear Hillary hinting that that the Bush administration is out to kill her. :confused:

[Genesis 1.0]

Rest assured that the accusations would be made and statements would be twisted to fit the event. What you fail to realize that there are always extremist, not all of them tote guns or strap themselves with bombs. Left, right, Islamic, it makes no diffrence, there's an element in every society that would promote this sort of action in a more deft but no less sinister manner.

Everyone seemingly enjoys the blame game.

[PhotoJones]

Rest assured that the accusations would be made and statements would be twisted to fit the event. What you fail to realize that there are always extremist, not all of them tote guns or strap themselves with bombs. Left, right, Islamic, it makes no diffrence, there's an element in every society that would promote this sort of action in a more deft but no less sinister manner.

Everyone seemingly enjoys the blame game.

I think what you're failing to realize is that Bhutto has strongly implied many times that Musharaff and/or his people were behind the falied assassination attempt on her life.

[Genesis 1.0]

I think what you're failing to realize is that Bhutto has strongly implied many times that Musharaff and/or his people were behind the falied assassination attempt on her life.

I highly doubt that I'm overlooking the fact seeing as I've been following the steady decline of the country after watching several seemingly promising 'power sharing' deals go to the dogs. I'm well aware of the situation prior to this tragedy, what we were pointing out was the simple fact that it's all too easy to jump to the obvious conclusion. Bhutto's image as anti-millitary would be just as much of a boon to Musharraf, a means to gradually regain his status in the country. Effectively playing both sides of the conflict.

Perhaps it's you that's overlooking the facts.

[PhotoJones]

I highly doubt that I'm overlooking the fact seeing as I've been following the steady decline of the country after watching several seemingly promising 'power sharing' deals go to the dogs. I'm well aware of the situation prior to this tragedy, what we were pointing out was the simple fact that it's all too easy to jump to the obvious conclusion. Bhutto's image as anti-millitary would be just as much of a boon to Musharraf, a means to gradually regain his status in the country. Effectively playing both sides of the conflict.

Perhaps it's you that's overlooking the facts.

Okay. Stop, take a breath and look back at what you said. You said, "I imagine the same would happen if Hilalry were asassinated."

How? How would this be the same thing? Because Bush and Clinton are members of opposing parties? Really, I have no idea how that would be remotely similar to what has actually happened.

Are you trying to say that Musharraf is going to the first person people look to because he was in opposition to Bhutto? Because if so, people have a much bigger reason than just that to point the finger at him.

[Zero_Vault]

Can the same thing happen to Hillary and the Argentian President?

[Genesis 1.0]

True indeed. Why would do something that does more damage for his reign? Like I said, he is the one at a disadvantage from this happening.

For every reason you feel qualifies him for this attack, there are others like this, that present the other side of the matter.

As to your point about Hillary, I don't know if you've looked at American politics lately but this country's being galvanized more and more on a daily basis. With the blathering extremist on both sides of the fence, you really believe that there wouldn't be a score of blogs, sites, and theories concerning her death and President Bush? That's simply naive with the level of extreme polarization we're seeing today.

[PhotoJones]

Why would people immediately think George Bush was behind the theoretical assassination of Hillary Clinton? There's no cause for that. Clinton's life isn't threatened by her opposition to Bush, and she's never publicly said that she feels threatened by Bush. That's asinine.

[Zero_Vault]

Nobody knows. It can happen.

And if it does, we know who to blame.

[hippie_hunter]

Such a horrible tragety to happen to such a woman. She was a rather big topic in my International Relations class and I can only sense that things will only get worse in Pakistan now because of this.

[PhotoJones]

Nobody knows. It can happen.

And if it does, we know who to blame.

We do? :confused:

[Wolfwood]

When you see those and can put a face to it, it starts to resonate more because it happened so recent.

So true, I'd hate to say it but without the images it's just another news blurb to some. These things happen so often, I feel like I'm almost desensitized to them.

[C.F. Kane]

So, when do we arrive at the point where Pakistan is no longer a country?

[The Squirrel]

I was watching BBC news on PBS the other month when she had first gotten back into the country and a sucide bomber tried to kill her then.

This is really bad.

[Super_Ludacris]

Make sure y'all get a chance to watch NBC Nightly News. There gonna show extensions of the Ann Curry interview of her from October after the first suicide attack.
She talks specifically about dying

[PhotoJones]

Like I mentioned before, NPR still has their interview with her on their site.

[Erundur]

eh, the kind of democracy pakistan wants to have will never happen

[04nbod]

not surprising considering one attempt failed not even a month ago

[Super_Ludacris]

2 months ago actually...

[04nbod]

2 months ago actually...

Wow time has flew.:csad:

[raybia]

Yes, a lot of Pakistanis held a resentment towards her. You yourself just mentioned who those people are: Musharraf, the military and the supporters of both.

What is so hard to understand about this?


Its not that I don't understand. I just disagree with your comment that those people mentioned above equates to "a lot of Pakistanis."

To use the phrase "a lot of Pakistanis" in a sentence conjures to mind a reference to the common people of Pakistan and I wouldn't call Musharraf, his military and his supporters as applying to the common people of that country of approx. 165 million.

They are small minority at best.

[raybia]

eh, the kind of democracy pakistan wants to have will never happen

I don't think will happen anywhere in the world.

[Super_Ludacris]

She was contrevorsial and divided figure no doubt. Still her latest plan even if was a scam didnt deserve a bullet in the dome. Its a bad look for Pakistan.... :(

[Erundur]

Pakistan's circular history
By M Ilyas Khan
BBC News

The story of Pakistan is one of remorseless tug and pull between the civilian and military rulers on the one hand, and the liberal and religious forces on the other.

In the process, the country has failed to become either a democracy, a theocracy or a permanent military dictatorship.

The chief casualties have been the rule of law, the state institutions and the process of national integration, with grave consequences for the civil society.

The "Talebanisation" of the north-western region is one manifestation of the prevalent disorder; an unending separatist campaign by nationalists in the south-western Balochistan province is another.

Meanwhile, sectarian and ethnic tensions have kept the two largest provinces - namely Punjab, which is the bread-basket of the country, and Sindh, which is its trading and industrial mainstay - perennially instable.

How and why did all this come about?

Hybrid system

The country was born in 1947 with a clean slate and a potential to follow in one of two directions.

It could opt for democracy. It had inherited democratic institutions and experience from the colonial rule, and was itself the creation of a democratic process involving national elections, parliamentary resolutions and a referendum.

Or it could become an Islamic emirate. The Pakistan movement was based on the theory that the Muslims of India were a nation and had a right to separate statehood.

They were granted separate electorate by the British rulers, and used Islamic identity as their main election slogan in 1937 and 1946.

But instead of making a clear choice, the early leaders tried to mix the two, and inadvertently sparked a series of political, legal and religious debacles that define today's Pakistan.

In political terms, democracy has been the first casualty of this hybrid system.

Its foundations were shaken by two controversial decisions made by the country's founder and first Governor-General, Mohammad Ali Jinnah.

He dismissed the Congress-led government of the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) by decree, and instead of ordering fresh elections, appointed a Muslim League leader as the chief minister with the mandate to whip up parliamentary support for himself.

Secondly, he declared to a large Bengali speaking audience in Dhaka, the capital of East Pakistan, that Urdu would be the only state language.

Alienation

The first action created a precedent for Governor-General Ghulam Mohammad, a former bureaucrat, to dismiss the country's first civilian government in 1953.

Since then, the governor-generals, presidents and army chiefs have dismissed as many as ten civilian governments that together ruled the country for 27 years. The remaining 33 years have seen direct military rule.

Mr Jinnah's second action alienated the Bengali population of the eastern wing, and set a precedent for the West Pakistani rulers to neutralise the numerical superiority of East Pakistan through legal entrapments and outright disenfranchisement.

After the secession of East Pakistan in 1971, the military rulers have repeatedly vitiated the federal and parliamentary character of the 1973 Constitution, thereby alienating the three smaller provinces of the remaining country.

Legal safeguards against tyranny fell by the wayside in 1954 when the Supreme Court justified the governor-general's dismissal of the government and the parliament by invoking the controversial 'theory of necessity'.

The theory has endured, and nearly every dismissal of a civilian government and every military takeover have been upheld by the higher judiciary, undermining democratic traditions.

On their part, the military rulers have co-opted both surrogate politicians and religious extremists as instruments of political strategy and national security policy.

The political recruits have provided a civilian façade to military governments, while religious - and sometimes ethnic - extremists have tended to distract and destabilise governments run by secular political forces.

Aid to dictators

Last, but not least, the Americans have tended to use their crucial financial and military support selectively against democratic governments.

The pattern is unmistakably clear.

The first large-scale American food and military aid started to pour into Pakistan in late 1953, months after the dismissal of its first civilian government.

It continued for a decade as Pakistan under a military regime joined various US-sponsored defence pacts against the Soviet Union.

The US started having problems with Pakistan when an elected government came to power in 1972, but poured billions of dollars into the country when another military regime took over in 1977 and agreed to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.

Similarly, while the elected governments that followed during 1988-99 had to live with a decade of US sanctions, the military regime of Gen Musharraf, that ousted the last civilian government in 1999, remains a 'well supplied' ally in the US' 'war on terror'.

There are, however, indications that the Americans may finally be getting fed up with Gen Musharraf, just as they got fed up with General Ayub Khan when he started to warm up to the Soviet Union after the 1965 war with India, or of General Zia-ul Haq when the Soviets decided to withdraw troops from Afghanistan in 1987.

There is also a gathering political storm on the horizon, in keeping with the cyclical pattern of the country's political weather.

As elections approach, exiled leaders Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, both former prime ministers, threaten to return to the country with the express aim of effecting a regime change.

But Gen Musharraf, like his predecessors, is fighting to keep his military office and his special powers under the constitution to dismiss governments and parliaments.

Thus, the story of Pakistan continues to be one of despotic regimes using religious extremists and external support to keep the secular democratic forces at bay; and when these forces do assert themselves, to tie them down in legal constraints that are designed to ensure their failure.

It is the story of a society that has been going round in circles for the last 60 years.

[Red Mask]

Im watching the news conference live on TV of him giving his condolences to Bhutto's family and the people of Pakistan and he just referred to her as Mr Bhutto......


Oh lord. How embarassing. Can I find that on YouTube?

[raybia]

She was contrevorsial and divided figure no doubt. Still her latest plan even if was a scam didnt deserve a bullet in the dome. Its a bad look for Pakistan.... :(

Yeah, her latest plan involved turning Pakistan into a true Democracy and a Free Enterprise system.

Its a bad look for the U.S. Government.

[Super_Ludacris]

Probably soon enough, I think me and my dad were the only ones who caught it

[Iceman]

From any viewpoint, this really hurts Pakistan. :csad:

Horribly inevitable after that 1st blast.

[raybia]

From any viewpoint, this really hurts Pakistan. :csad:

Horribly inevitable after that 1st blast.

If you mean the masses of Pakistan then I agree. Bhutto would have help to usher in a more democratic way of live that would have included a Free Enterprise system. It would have really raised the quality of life in that country.

Instead it may be doomed to become another Iraq.

[The Senator]

If you mean the masses of Pakistan then I agree. Bhutto would have help to usher in a more democratic way of live that would have included a Free Enterprise system. It would have really raised the quality of life in that country.

Instead it made be doomed to become another Iraq.

It's sad, but true. I felt like Bhutto and the opposition could have brought great things to Pakistan, especially the implementation of a free enterprise system, which is crucial for growing democratic countries. Now, it looks like that won't happen in the near future, if at all.

This is truly a shocking, unjust tragedy.

[The Overlord]

A lot of Pakistanis hold resentment towards her? :huh:

Yeah, Musharraf, those in his Government and his supporters who are benefiting from his dictatorial rule.

The common people of Pakistan, the masses loved this woman because it was her who was trying to change the country into a place that would be beneficial them.

Some fundamentalists didn't like the fact she was woman running for PM and I doubt the military has suicide bombers on the pay roll. Musharraf will take advantage of this, but that doesn't mean he was directly responsible, though he may have lesssen the security around her.

[raybia]

Some fundamentalists didn't like the fact she was woman running for PM and I doubt the military has suicide bombers on the pay roll. Musharraf will take advantage of this, but that doesn't mean he was directly responsible, though he may have lesssen the security around her.

The info coming out says otherwise.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=201040

Bhutto would disagree with you.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/wolf-blitzer-bhutto

[Arkady Rossovich]

I heard about this not too long ago,some say it was a plot by the Government.

[hippie_hunter]

I think it was the Pakistani government that did it. Musharaf comes off as a person willing to do anything to preserve his own power IMO.

[Zero_Vault]

We all know who did it.

The same one who concocted 9-11.

[bored]

Osama? I guess it's possible.

[Zero_Vault]

No, silly.

Bush.

[Red Mask]

No, silly.

Bush.

Ha! Ha! Very droll.

[The Overlord]

The info coming out says otherwise.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=201040

Bhutto would disagree with you.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/wolf-blitzer-bhutto

The first story talked about the government fudging the security, not being directly responsible, however it does make them indirectly responislble and that may have intentional. But suicide bombers are not military M.O, why would someone blow themselves for the miliatary?

As for Bhutto, she couldn't see in the future, so how would her comments have any barring on who killed her? Everything comes back to M.O, everyone leaves a phsychological finger print when they do something.

[chamber-music]

It was probabley one of islamic extreamist groups from the north-western region. I doubt the military would use suicide bombers when they could easily of killed her like her brothers and father.

[Mr Sparkle]

you know the saddest thing?
as most holy documents, the Q'ran is mistranslated or mis-interpreted because some people think it says to treat women like the dirt beneath your feet.
but it's really meant to convey the Idea of treating women like the soil.
which, when you think about it ( and anyone that's ever been on a farm) is actually quite different.

[amazingfantasy15]

you know the saddest thing?
as most holy documents, the Q'ran is mistranslated or mis-interpreted because some people think it says to treat women like the dirt beneath your feet.
but it's really meant to convey the Idea of treating women like the soil.
which, when you think about it ( and anyone that's ever been on a farm) is actually quite different.

What? Fundamentalist Muslims mis-interprete the Q'ran to fit their own agenda? I won't hear it! Death to this infidel! Allah demands it!

[teseract]

This is so sad, and dangerous. This whole incident might develop into a serious global crisis. We might stand at the dawn of the third world war.

[bored]

No, silly.

Bush.


....

You ARE kidding, right?

[luke1234]

News just came in that The Pakistani president states that Al Qaeda was behind the attacks, im not sure if it was them though. It could of been any islamic extremest for the opposing political party.

This is terrible, she could of changed the middle east, she had the potential to be the female ghandi

[Red Mask]

you know the saddest thing?
as most holy documents, the Q'ran is mistranslated or mis-interpreted because some people think it says to treat women like the dirt beneath your feet.
but it's really meant to convey the Idea of treating women like the soil.
which, when you think about it ( and anyone that's ever been on a farm) is actually quite different.

Wait, that doesn't make sense. Treating the soil would probably mean tending to it, since in that region soil is very precious. Isn't that why some interpret it like 'women are as tender as flowers'?

[Red Mask]

This is so sad, and dangerous. This whole incident might develop into a serious global crisis. We might stand at the dawn of the third world war.

Not sure how that would play out. Neighboring India won't go to war over the killing of Benazir. The U.S. won't get more involved because they just need any lackey to control Pakistan and fight Al-Qaeda. The Arab League won't make a big political stink over it. Israel better to shut up on it. Everybody else is just giving their political condolences. The economy will rebound from this eventually.

[Memphis Slim]

Wait, that doesn't make sense. Treating the soil would probably mean tending to it, since in that region soil is very precious. Isn't that why some interpret it like 'women are as tender as flowers'?


It is okay to beat wives Quotes from Koran:
"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all)," (4:34).
It's just wee little bit of beating.

Heaven is one big orgy....


In Paradise, voluptuous women await men for sensual gratification
"In them will be (Maidens), chaste, restraining their glances, whom no man or Jinn before them has touched," (55:56).
"We have created (their Companions) of special creation. And made them virgin - pure (and undefiled), - Beloved (by nature), equal in age,- For the Companions of the Right Hand," (56:35-38)
"Verily for the Righteous there will be a fulfillment of (the heart's) desires; Gardens enclosed, and grapevines, And voluptuous women of equal age," (78:31-33).

Men have more rights regarding divorce than do women
Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise," (2:28)

Now I don't know how all of this is like tending to soil. So please explain.

[Memphis Slim]

Bhutto was a good woman. But she was pushing a against a tidal wave. It was only a matter of time.

[Mr. Socko]

Horrible, horrible times. She didn't deserve to die, my condolences go out to every innocent person in that country.

[Mr Sparkle]

Wait, that doesn't make sense. Treating the soil would probably mean tending to it, since in that region soil is very precious. Isn't that why some interpret it like 'women are as tender as flowers'?

yes, you're almost right.
like I said, they interpret it the way they wanted to.
as "the dirt beneath your feet" instead of the life giving "soil" which had to be revered.
many religions used their texts and interpreted them to fit their particular view of the world, in those times it was almost inevitably misogynistic.
for instance in the bible you get to kill a woman if she's not a virgin when you marry her, Deuteronomy told me so:

"Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you."

apparently you could bring your best friends along to kill her, kind of like Halo3 but with more actual death and less virginity, at least among one of the participants.
plus I love the "stone her with stones" clarification, apparently some dudes must've tried stoning non-virginal brides with something else, I'm guessing bread, and this effort was less than successful.
but yeah, doesn't say you can beat 'em or nothing, cuz that would be barbaric.
there's that one in Exodus where if a dude kicks a pregnant woman in the belly and she has a miscarriage the guilty one has to pay a fine....

to the husband :dry:

"...he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine."

but yeah, totally better than Islam the Christianity, mostly because it's members are able to compartmentalize their own atrocious behavior towards the women in their own religion.
cuz, c'mon it's the Old testament and it's not like we listen to THAT part of the Bible anymore right? ( but yeah, when it's convenient, Christians quote from it all the time. hang around the hype for the next thrilling "god hates homosexuals" tirade)
I mean, women have ALWAYS been treated as equals in the "free thinking" Christian portions of the Earth right?
oh...no?
sorry, I just assumed.

[jaguarr]

I wonder how most Pakistanis feel about letting bin Laden hide in their mountains all these years after this assassination. Maybe that wasn't such a great idea, guys.

jag

[Mr Sparkle]

I'm sorry Jag :(

[jaguarr]

You cut me deep, Pakistan! DEEP! I don't know if I'll EVER get over this! :cmad:

jag

[Red Mask]

yes, you're almost right.
like I said, they interpret it the way they wanted to.
as "the dirt beneath your feet" instead of the life giving "soil" which had to be revered.
many religions used their texts and interpreted them to fit their particular view of the world, in those times it was almost inevitably misogynistic.
for instance in the bible you get to kill a woman if she's not a virgin when you marry her, Deuteronomy told me so:

"Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you."

apparently you could bring your best friends along to kill her, kind of like Halo3 but with more actual death and less virginity, at least among one of the participants.
plus I love the "stone her with stones" clarification, apparently some dudes must've tried stoning non-virginal brides with something else, I'm guessing bread, and this effort was less than successful.
but yeah, doesn't say you can beat 'em or nothing, cuz that would be barbaric.
there's that one in Exodus where if a dude kicks a pregnant woman in the belly and she has a miscarriage the guilty one has to pay a fine....

to the husband :dry:

"...he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine."

but yeah, totally better than Islam the Christianity, mostly because it's members are able to compartmentalize their own atrocious behavior towards the women in their own religion.
cuz, c'mon it's the Old testament and it's not like we listen to THAT part of the Bible anymore right? ( but yeah, when it's convenient, Christians quote from it all the time. hang around the hype for the next thrilling "god hates homosexuals" tirade)
I mean, women have ALWAYS been treated as equals in the "free thinking" Christian portions of the Earth right?
oh...no?
sorry, I just assumed.

O.K. You answered that half of the question for me. It would explain why Saudi Arabia gives less rights to women as compared to Indonesia or even Pakistan.

The Old Testament said that? No wonder Jimmy Carter is disturbed with the return of fundamentalism in his religion.

[Red Mask]

I wonder how most Pakistanis feel about letting bin Laden hide in their mountains all these years after this assassination. Maybe that wasn't such a great idea, guys.

jag

That mountain area of Pakistan isn't even within the full authority of the government. It's not a united country.

[Zero_Vault]

It is okay to beat wives Quotes from Koran:
"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all)," (4:34).

It's just wee little bit of beating.

Heaven is one big orgy....


In Paradise, voluptuous women await men for sensual gratification
"In them will be (Maidens), chaste, restraining their glances, whom no man or Jinn before them has touched," (55:56).
"We have created (their Companions) of special creation. And made them virgin - pure (and undefiled), - Beloved (by nature), equal in age,- For the Companions of the Right Hand," (56:35-38)
"Verily for the Righteous there will be a fulfillment of (the heart's) desires; Gardens enclosed, and grapevines, And voluptuous women of equal age," (78:31-33).

Men have more rights regarding divorce than do women
Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise," (2:28)



Now I don't know how all of this is like tending to soil. So please explain.


The Koran is a carbon-copy of the Bible, written by one man--a fool. :wow:

This is my honest opinion. We will see if it becomes a fact on the last day.

[chamber-music]

I wonder how most Pakistanis feel about letting bin Laden hide in their mountains all these years after this assassination. Maybe that wasn't such a great idea, guys.

jag

The people who supported Bhutto where not Bin Laden supporters. The Pakistanis who support Bin Laden where probabley happy about it.

You gotta remember Pakistan is a huge country. With a make up of lots of different groups. You have the progressive modern people in the big cities and villages. Then you got warlords and tribes of cattle rearing nomads in the empty mountains and wilderness.

[bullets]

You gotta remember Pakistan is a huge country. With a make up of lots of different groups. You have the progressive modern people in the big cities and villages. Then you got warlords and tribes of cattle rearing nomads in the empty mountains and wilderness.


That is actually a good summation of Iraq as well . Too bad this woman had to be taken out like this. It was barbaric and disgusting and these people have no concept of poilitics.

[Red Mask]

Iraq didn't have a problem with warlords for decades until Saddam was overthrown.

[Mr Sparkle]

The Old Testament said that? No wonder Jimmy Carter is disturbed with the return of fundamentalism in his religion.

the old testament says worse things than that.
see, this is my problem with some Christians, they can live a righteous life and think they follow their religion, even if they ignore the parts of the bible they disagree with, the unsavory parts that deal with killing people who work on saturday ( or was it sunday) and witches and all that.

but...

they can't fathom another religion like say....Islam and think "man, their holy text is rife with misogyny and death...they MUST be evil" even though really their holy text is very similar.

soooo weird.
I didn't know about the treating women like flowers bit, that one is new to me.

[Figs]

It is okay to beat wives Quotes from Koran:
"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all)," (4:34).

It's just wee little bit of beating.

Heaven is one big orgy....


In Paradise, voluptuous women await men for sensual gratification
"In them will be (Maidens), chaste, restraining their glances, whom no man or Jinn before them has touched," (55:56).
"We have created (their Companions) of special creation. And made them virgin - pure (and undefiled), - Beloved (by nature), equal in age,- For the Companions of the Right Hand," (56:35-38)
"Verily for the Righteous there will be a fulfillment of (the heart's) desires; Gardens enclosed, and grapevines, And voluptuous women of equal age," (78:31-33).

Men have more rights regarding divorce than do women
Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise," (2:28)



Now I don't know how all of this is like tending to soil. So please explain.



LOL, what's in bold is the most bull**** humanist thing ever. I'm not saying the Christian/Catholic bible or any other is the "truth", but sorry I couldn't take the muslim religion seriously once I found out that was one of their beliefs.

I don't see how anyone can deny that it wasn't mans way to keep people under control. Not to mention the fact that for a supposed "all loving god" with morals, it's a bit strange he would allow rampant sex in his "paradise".

[Seibei]

the old testament says worse things than that.
see, this is my problem with some Christians, they can live a righteous life and think they follow their religion, even if they ignore the parts of the bible they disagree with, the unsavory parts that deal with killing people who work on saturday ( or was it sunday) and witches and all that.



If you had a basic understand of any New Testament writings you will find that the Old Testament (literally, Old Covenant, and more specifically the Law of Moses) was rendered inoperative and a New Covenant was instituted. Hence the term, New Testament, because it's a brand new rule of life, or law.

Just as the United States superseded the Articles of Confederation with the Constitution, so was the Law of Moses was replaced with the New Covenant. So no, Christians don't ignore parts of the Bible they disagree with.

[Shoegazer]

This is so sad, and dangerous. This whole incident might develop into a serious global crisis. We might stand at the dawn of the third world war.

Doubtful. A more likely scenario is if radical Islamists manage to overthrow the Musharraf government and get their hands on Pakistan's 50 or more nuclear weapons. (Something that is very possible.) I think India would most likely nuke Pakistan before they got a chance to use them. I can imagine a domino effect if that happens. I'm pretty sure a global conflict on the scale of another world war would happen then.

[teseract]

Doubtful. A more likely scenario is if radical Islamists manage to overthrow the Musharraf government and get their hands on Pakistan's 50 or more nuclear weapons. (Something that is very possible.) I think India would most likely nuke Pakistan before they got a chance to use them. I can imagine a domino effect if that happens. I'm pretty sure a global conflict on the scale of another world war would happen then.

That's exactly what I meant.

[The Overlord]

yes, you're almost right.
like I said, they interpret it the way they wanted to.
as "the dirt beneath your feet" instead of the life giving "soil" which had to be revered.
many religions used their texts and interpreted them to fit their particular view of the world, in those times it was almost inevitably misogynistic.
for instance in the bible you get to kill a woman if she's not a virgin when you marry her, Deuteronomy told me so:

"Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you."

apparently you could bring your best friends along to kill her, kind of like Halo3 but with more actual death and less virginity, at least among one of the participants.
plus I love the "stone her with stones" clarification, apparently some dudes must've tried stoning non-virginal brides with something else, I'm guessing bread, and this effort was less than successful.
but yeah, doesn't say you can beat 'em or nothing, cuz that would be barbaric.
there's that one in Exodus where if a dude kicks a pregnant woman in the belly and she has a miscarriage the guilty one has to pay a fine....

to the husband :dry:

"...he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine."

but yeah, totally better than Islam the Christianity, mostly because it's members are able to compartmentalize their own atrocious behavior towards the women in their own religion.
cuz, c'mon it's the Old testament and it's not like we listen to THAT part of the Bible anymore right? ( but yeah, when it's convenient, Christians quote from it all the time. hang around the hype for the next thrilling "god hates homosexuals" tirade)
I mean, women have ALWAYS been treated as equals in the "free thinking" Christian portions of the Earth right?
oh...no?
sorry, I just assumed.


That just proves that all organized, monotheistic, evangelical religions suck equally, if Christianity is stupid doesn't make Islam seem any better by comparison, this just proof that the eastern religions like Buddhism are better than either of those two religions. If you can come with evidence that makes Islam comparable with Buddhism on a practical level, then I would be impressed. Seriously this like a company with a bad product and instead of improving their product, they spend their time attacking their competitors crappy products, it doesn't like the first product any better.

[Captain_BluTac]

its terrible that a thread devoted to funny pictures is far more successful than this thread

[Arkady Rossovich]

I think it was the Pakistani government that did it. Musharaf comes off as a person willing to do anything to preserve his own power IMO.

That's right,there's some footage of someone pointing a gun at her just before the bomb went off.A few shots were fired,i think that killed her.The "skull fracture" was something put up by the Government.The people are angry,i bet they think she was killed by a Government hitman.

[Red Mask]

its terrible that a thread devoted to funny pictures is far more successful than this thread

It just goes to show you how important this issue is to members of these boards.

[Zero_Vault]

Again, what Mr. Sparkle posted is not a literal take of a whore put to death.

But the spiritual whore that is Satan himself, being worshipped by the Judeo-Christian, in the house of God.

The whole Bible is a parable, even Christ said it himself in Isiah and the New Testaments.

[Fran]

Extremely sad to see this happen...

Kinda reminds me... didn't World War II get triggered by an assassination?

[Mr Sparkle]

If you had a basic understand of any New Testament writings you will find that the Old Testament (literally, Old Covenant, and more specifically the Law of Moses) was rendered inoperative and a New Covenant was instituted. Hence the term, New Testament, because it's a brand new rule of life, or law.

Just as the United States superseded the Articles of Confederation with the Constitution, so was the Law of Moses was replaced with the New Covenant. So no, Christians don't ignore parts of the Bible they disagree with.

If you had a basic understanding of your own religion, Jesus pretty much says he is not the end of the law but the fulfillment.
like I said, just because you don't follow or like it, doesn't mean it's not there.
so yes, Christians DO ignore the parts of the bible they disagree with, so much so that within the confines of the church, the application of Mosaic law is still highly controversial.
in other words, your mainline to God still doesn't know for sure.

good to know you cracked the code though.
better get on the phone to all those religious scholars and tell them, they must be anxious to hear your explanation.

[Mr Sparkle]

That just proves that all organized, monotheistic, evangelical religions suck equally, if Christianity is stupid doesn't make Islam seem any better by comparison, this just proof that the eastern religions like Buddhism are better than either of those two religions. If you can come with evidence that makes Islam comparable with Buddhism on a practical level, then I would be impressed. Seriously this like a company with a bad product and instead of improving their product, they spend their time attacking their competitors crappy products, it doesn't like the first product any better.

:huh: I'd like for you to browse this thread and look for the part in which I say or imply that Islam is better "by comparison"
and, how is Islam "my product":huh: and how am i responsible for improving upon it?
you'd do well to "improve" your reading skills and maybe then we'll talk, until then, impressing you?
not that high on my "to do" list.

so all that stuff you typed? yeah, it's pretty stupid.

[Dew k. Mosi]

If this doesn't stop, I will give you both probation

[Superman]

Wait, What was this thread about again?:huh:

[Seibei]

If you had a basic understanding of your own religion, Jesus pretty much says he is not the end of the law but the fulfillment.

You just combined two different passages, one from Paul's epistles and one from the Gospels, so you're quote isn't even right. Jesus said, "Do not think I come to destroy the law or the prophets, I come not to destroy, but to fulfill."

The Greek word for destroy means to render vain, and since the point of the Law and the Prophets is to point to the Messiah, for him to destroy the law would be to toss out the entire purpose of the Law and Prophets which is to point to him. However, the Greek word for fulfill means to carry through till the end. And as Paul pointed out very clearly, "Christ is the end of the law to everyone who believes." For Jesus to fulfill the law doesn't mean the law continues, it means it ends with the full promise of the law intact, and it's purpose to have been accomplished. Hence the reason Jeremiah speaks of a New Covenant. When you fulfill a vow, you don't keep working towards it.

Once the law is fulfilled, it's function as the rule of life ends. Not only does the Greek demonstrate this meaning in the passage, but Paul's epistles, which you know are scripture in Christian churches, frequently say the law has came to an end. So yes, I do know my religion, far more than you do.



like I said, just because you don't follow or like it, doesn't mean it's not there.
so yes, Christians DO ignore the parts of the bible they disagree with, so much so that within the confines of the church, the application of Mosaic law is still highly controversial.
in other words, your mainline to God still doesn't know for sure.

It matters not to me what certain denominations believe, what matters is the Greek, Hebrew, and the simple meaning of writings.

[Captain_BluTac]

they have a photo of the gunman

[dpm07]

Extremely sad to see this happen...

Kinda reminds me... didn't World War II get triggered by an assassination?

Actually, WWI was triggered by the assassination of the Archduke Francis Ferdinand. He was killed by a Bosnian student named Gavrilo Princep. It should be pointed out that Europe was headed toward a conflict. The assassination was really the straw that broke the camel's back. The other countries ended up involved because of alliances.

[Red Mask]

they have a photo of the gunman

Yeah. The finger pointing continues into 2008. :csad:

[Mr Sparkle]

You just combined two different passages, one from Paul's epistles and one from the Gospels, so you're quote isn't even right. Jesus said, "Do not think I come to destroy the law or the prophets, I come not to destroy, but to fulfill."

hahaha! how can I misquote something I never even quoted?:huh:
that's impossible.
however let's keep reading.

even though we're pretty much saying the same thing.

The Greek word for destroy means to render vain, and since the point of the Law and the Prophets is to point to the Messiah, for him to destroy the law would be to toss out the entire purpose of the Law and Prophets which is to point to him. However, the Greek word for fulfill means to carry through till the end. And as Paul pointed out very clearly, "Christ is the end of the law to everyone who believes." For Jesus to fulfill the law doesn't mean the law continues, it means it ends with the full promise of the law intact, and it's purpose to have been accomplished. Hence the reason Jeremiah speaks of a New Covenant. When you fulfill a vow, you don't keep working towards it.

Once the law is fulfilled, it's function as the rule of life ends. Not only does the Greek demonstrate this meaning in the passage, but Paul's epistles, which you know are scripture in Christian churches, frequently say the law has came to an end. So yes, I do know my religion, far more than you do.

wow! that was neat.
except here (http://www.amazon.com/Durham-Tubingen-Research-Symposium-Christianity-University/dp/0802844995) in Amazon.com they sell a book.
this book is about the application of Mosaic law.
here's the sinopsis.

This volume explores the perennial debate over Paul’s understanding of and attitude toward the Mosaic Law. Sixteen outstanding international scholars examine the key passages in the letters of Paul that deal with the Jewish law. Their work not only provides a clearer view of the issues involved but also shows the range of interpretive approaches now being used in this important area of study.

so, like I said before.
get on the line to these people and solve this perennial debate ( you do know what perennial means right?
plus it links to several other books and they all talk of an "ongoing debate" or "ongoing discussion" again, it's neat to see how you got it all figured out, it just doesn't necessarily mean it is.:cwink:


It matters not to me what certain denominations believe, what matters is the Greek, Hebrew, and the simple meaning of writings.

actually, it's not "certain denominations" just plain old Christians like you who don't think that they should listen to paul over Jesus for instance.
I love how Jesus can say that he came to fulfill the law and fulfill means


carry through: put in effect; "carry out a task"; "execute the decision of the people"; "He actioned the operation"
satisfy: fulfil the requirements or expectations of
meet: fill or meet a want or need

and you ( like most people ) go like "what Jesus meant to say was..."
and what Jesus means is always whatever fits you most comfortably.
nevermind that you still adamantly take portions of the mosaic law to heart, nevermind that there's still a debate within your own church.

yeah, nevermind that only People AFTER Jesus say this ( though Jesus never says it himself) the whole saved by grace thing is kind of hilarious, because then why would only portions of the Mosaic law apply?
( since, you know it's not like you go around killing people, or coveting their oxen...:huh:) so actually, again, if you knew anything about the Bible or your religion, you'd know that there is no "simple meaning" to the writings and that people far more intelligent than you or I are still debating over these meanings that seem so "simple" to you.

[xisaacx]

doomed society

[Seibei]

hahaha! how can I misquote something I never even quoted?:huh:
that's impossible.
however let's keep reading.

You paraphrased a quotation, but then combined what he said with something else. So whether you meant to directly quote him, you point was still wrong.


wow! that was neat.
except here (http://www.amazon.com/Durham-Tubingen-Research-Symposium-Christianity-University/dp/0802844995) in Amazon.com they sell a book.
this book is about the application of Mosaic law.
here's the sinopsis.

That's fantastic. There's lots of books, still isn't going to change what the Greek and Hebrew actually says.



so, like I said before.
get on the line to these people and solve this perennial debate ( you do know what perennial means right?
plus it links to several other books and they all talk of an "ongoing debate" or "ongoing discussion" again, it's neat to see how you got it all figured out, it just doesn't necessarily mean it is.:cwink:

One of the positions is true, and the rest are false. Just because there's a debate about it, doesn't mean I won't defend the position I think is true.


actually, it's not "certain denominations" just plain old Christians like you who don't think that they should listen to paul over Jesus for instance.
I love how Jesus can say that he came to fulfill the law and fulfill means


carry through: put in effect; "carry out a task"; "execute the decision of the people"; "He actioned the operation"
satisfy: fulfil the requirements or expectations of
meet: fill or meet a want or need

The Greek word used for fulfill in Matthew means to complete, carry through to the end. It doesn't carry the connotation of coming to fulfill something by continuing it, but by fulfilling the requirements left, and ending it.

and you ( like most people ) go like "what Jesus meant to say was..."
and what Jesus means is always whatever fits you most comfortably.
nevermind that you still adamantly take portions of the mosaic law to heart, nevermind that there's still a debate within your own church.

No, I don't say what Jesus "meant" to say, I present what he did say, in the context of the 1st century, and within the confines of the Hebrew language and Greek texts.

And no, I don't take any portion of the Mosaic law to heart. I don't believe any of the 613 commandments in it are in force today.

yeah, nevermind that only People AFTER Jesus say this ( though Jesus never says it himself) the whole saved by grace thing is kind of hilarious, because then why would only portions of the Mosaic law apply?
( since, you know it's not like you go around killing people, or coveting their oxen...:huh:) so actually, again, if you knew anything about the Bible or your religion, you'd know that there is no "simple meaning" to the writings and that people far more intelligent than you or I are still debating over these meanings that seem so "simple" to you.

When did I say any portion of the Mosaic Law applied today? I didn't. Not one of the 613 commandments in it apply today. I don't pick and choose what I want to believe in the Mosaic law. I don't murder, or covet; not because the Mosaic law said not to, but because Christ in his law said not to. Paul speaks of the Law of Messiah, this is separate from the Mosaic law, with points of similarity.

This is why you won't find a single New Testament writing to any gentile that tells the believers to observe the Sabbath, or not eat foods forbidden by the Torah. They all recognize the Law had been completed, and no longer was the law in effect. It's also why you won't find any believer in the New Testament sacrificing in the temple for sin. The Mosaic law had to come to completion, and end as the rule of life, because a large majority of it concerns sacrifice for sin, which was fulfilled by Jesus' death. Hence the point of a New Covenant, which supersedes the old.

[Metamorpho1977]

Way To Go Mr.bush, Screwed Up Another Middle East Country.

[luke1234]

Its not entirely bush's fault, islamic extremeist are just crazy man. Its a real shame

[Metamorpho1977]

I know it's not, I just figured I'd beat someone to the punch, because I know there's someone on here somewhere that thinks it's all his fault.

[Red Mask]

Well, let's put him aside and stick to the main topic here. Benazir's husband and their 19-year old son are now the leaders of her party. There's a chance parliamentary elections will be delayed. The road to democracy stretches further.

[Red Mask]

Calm down.

[Mr Sparkle]

You paraphrased a quotation, but then combined what he said with something else. So whether you meant to directly quote him, you point was still wrong.

actually, my point was that I didn't quote anyone BUT Jesus.

"If you had a basic understanding of your own religion, Jesus pretty much says he is not the end of the law but the fulfillment."

see? if jesus said I come not to end the law but to fulfill it, I fail to see how I paraphrased it wrong.

complete quote?

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished"

see?


That's fantastic. There's lots of books, still isn't going to change what the Greek and Hebrew actually says.

hahahaha! yeah, because see THEY ( the bible scholars aren't sure) so It must be as cut and dry as you put it huh?
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!



One of the positions is true, and the rest are false. Just because there's a debate about it, doesn't mean I won't defend the position I think is true.

no, you ASSUME the rest are false, because see, if the rest were false there would be no debate to be had, hence no debate within the church about Jesus being an alien transvestite.
plus, I like how at the end you kind of acknowledge the fact that you defend the position you think is true.

good for you on that one. you get half a gold star for it.


The Greek word used for fulfill in Matthew means to complete, carry through to the end. It doesn't carry the connotation of coming to fulfill something by continuing it, but by fulfilling the requirements left, and ending it.


no, sorry that's the INTERPRETATION so much so that like I said portions of the Mosaic law are still obeyed by christians, unlike you, it's not what I THINK might be, it's what it is.
that's kind of definitive when you think about it.

No, I don't say what Jesus "meant" to say, I present what he did say, in the context of the 1st century, and within the confines of the Hebrew language and Greek texts.

haha! no, you are.
see again, the debate, I could tell you until I'm red in the face and you wouldn't understand it.
both the translation and interpretation of the words is being contested on both parts, BOTH OF THEM.
seem plausible to you?
no?
TOO BAD, because that's the way it is! hahahahaha!

And no, I don't take any portion of the Mosaic law to heart. I don't believe any of the 613 commandments in it are in force today.

actually you do.
the wording has been changed but the ten commandments or god's MORAL law as you probably know it are still very much in effect today.
that's a part of the Mosaic law, in fact, some Christians follow Noahide Laws ( which sound like fake leather to me) and those also come from the O to the T.
ha, Just ask the Biblical literalists and some Orthodox Christians and see what they tell you.
but yeah, like I said, I'm glad YOU figured it out, really glad.


When did I say any portion of the Mosaic Law applied today? I didn't. Not one of the 613 commandments in it apply today. I don't pick and choose what I want to believe in the Mosaic law. I don't murder, or covet; not because the Mosaic law said not to, but because Christ in his law said not to. Paul speaks of the Law of Messiah, this is separate from the Mosaic law, with points of similarity.

This is why you won't find a single New Testament writing to any gentile that tells the believers to observe the Sabbath, or not eat foods forbidden by the Torah. They all recognize the Law had been completed, and no longer was the law in effect. It's also why you won't find any believer in the New Testament sacrificing in the temple for sin. The Mosaic law had to come to completion, and end as the rule of life, because a large majority of it concerns sacrifice for sin, which was fulfilled by Jesus' death. Hence the point of a New Covenant, which supersedes the old.

see but this is the point, I'm not saying you specifically, if this was about YOU I'd have no trouble saying that YES indeed YOU being the only Christian in existence with the only interpretation available there is no other way to view the words of Christ.
But see, you're not, and you're one of MANY Christians no doubt that BELIEVE that Jesus had a law, but If I remember correctly the whole Paul thing? didn't he have Visions or something? wasn't he one of the few that like DIDN'T hang out with The Christ on a regular Basis?
the whole NEW COVENANT thing? I have heard it before, and like I said, that's the way YOU interpret it, but others don't share your views, others within your own church.
do you understand that?

[Superman]

Way To Go Mr.bush, Screwed Up Another Middle East Country.Now I hate Bush as much as the next guy but I don't think her assassination is his fault.

He's done alot of things to get the people of muslim faith to hate the US but this isn't one of them.

[Concept Name]

It is okay to beat wives Quotes from Koran:
"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all)," (4:34).
It's just wee little bit of beating.

Heaven is one big orgy....


In Paradise, voluptuous women await men for sensual gratification
"In them will be (Maidens), chaste, restraining their glances, whom no man or Jinn before them has touched," (55:56).
"We have created (their Companions) of special creation. And made them virgin - pure (and undefiled), - Beloved (by nature), equal in age,- For the Companions of the Right Hand," (56:35-38)
"Verily for the Righteous there will be a fulfillment of (the heart's) desires; Gardens enclosed, and grapevines, And voluptuous women of equal age," (78:31-33).

Men have more rights regarding divorce than do women
Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise," (2:28)

Now I don't know how all of this is like tending to soil. So please explain.


can you tell me where you got this??

[Erundur]

Now I hate Bush as much as the next guy but I don't think her assassination is his fault.

He's done alot of things to get the people of muslim faith to hate the US but this isn't one of them.

Its more like he wanted her to really work with musharraf than anything else, but not assassination.

[Red Mask]

The relation between the U.S. and Bhutto was discussed on the BBC last night. One reporter said Bush had never met Benazir Bhutto face to face. However, his government did meet with her and discuss her return to Pakistan. What amazed the BBC reporter most was how the U.S. was o.k. with it but did not press the need for greater protection while she was back in her country.

[Erundur]

The relation between the U.S. and Bhutto was discussed on the BBC last night. One reporter said Bush had never met Benazir Bhutto face to face. However, his government did meet with her and discuss her return to Pakistan. What amazed the BBC reporter most was how the U.S. was o.k. with it but did not press the need for greater protection while she was back in her country.

a democratically elected gov't is of no benefit to us.

[unstoppable]

who :huh:

[teseract]

It IS his fault, you tarde!
No, it's not Pakistan was a failed state pretty much from the begining.

[chamber-music]

Well, let's put him aside and stick to the main topic here. Benazir's husband and their 19-year old son are now the leaders of her party. There's a chance parliamentary elections will be delayed. The road to democracy stretches further.

I hate to say this but one or both of them will probabley end up getting killed like the rest of the Bhutto family.

[Red Mask]

a democratically elected gov't is of no benefit to us.

I don't know who 'us' is supposed to be, but Pakistan hasn't done so well under military rule either.

[kane9321]

i hope her husband and kid dont get assassinated:(

[Arkady Rossovich]

Extremely sad to see this happen...

Kinda reminds me... didn't World War II get triggered by an assassination?

That was World War I,Bhutto only wanted peace.She said she wanted to serve her country and help modernize it.I wonder what people from Pakistan think of all this.

[Sebastos]

I couldn't believe it when I heard it. Truely sad news. I respected Bhutto and she really didn't deserve to die. But you have to ask, why would she stick her hear out of the car? I mean wow...May she rest in peace.

who :huh:

You should really watch the news more often.

[Red Mask]

O.K. Here's something new to add to the speculation.

There is a new accusation that Benazir was murdered because she said on a 'censored' BBC interview that Osama Bin Laden is already dead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnychOXj9Tg

This could help explain why last year - or earlier - the C.I.A. disbanded the unit formed to search for Bin Laden. It can also help explain why the Pakistani govt. forces are not seriously looking for him either. But does this speculation have anything to do with Bhutto's death?

[echostation]

it's not like she was going to do much... she, Nawaz sharif and Musharraf are all fraggin corrupt as hell bureaucrats who wouldn't do much for the failed nation of Pakistan anyways...

Note that I'm half Pakistani myself and I believe for one that the creation of the country is based on hate, insecurity and failure alone... There are far far more Muslims in India than the entire nation of Pakistan has in its own borders... so much for the land of security for Muslims... Muslims may have hard times in India but I could ask any of my muslim friends and islamic neighbours in any shop, bazaar or bloody anywhere and they'd choose to be in India than in some rancid insecure cerfew laden **** hole in Pakistan.

[Red Mask]

So do your Muslims friends agree that Osama bin Laden was already killed years ago? Do you think that rumour is why Benazir was killed?

[echostation]

Naa, not at all... Benazir went into Pakistan knowing full well the dangers of what might happen to her... namely that multiple assasination attempts would probably be made on her and then passed off as attempts by rogue elements or extremist elements.

To put it shortly, Musharraf has an iron grip over the nation yet at the same time he oversees the ISI (InterService Intelligence - the Pakistani CIA/intelligensia)... the ISI though are much older than Musharraf, they've supported the creation of the Taliban, have comfortably housed multiple Islamic Terrorists and known criminals (Dawood Ibrahim, Asia's biggest criminal freely allowed to attend his daughter's wedding in Karachi some years ago) wanted by Americans and Indians, they backed and help planned the thwarted Kargil incursion attempt back in 1998/99 where Pakistani soldiers and Islamic militants together crossed over the Kashmiri LOC and tried to take Indian positions.

The election is going to be rigged like no one else's business, there'll be one vote and one vote alone, for Musharraf which means a vote for his absolute military control and his control over the ISI - it's these boys who were ultimately responsible for Benazir's death. Not some radicalist element in situ. Could the actual physical act of the killing been done by a radical element? Perhaps but the allowance was surely made by Musharraf's administration. Afterall, when his top interior ministry members believe that Benazir killed herself by bumping her head despite that she was first shot in the neck and then a suicide bomb rampaged and slammed her, Bin Laden doesn't really come into the picture.

It's ultimately a question of who will get power. Musharraf tried to broker a power sharing deal with Benazir... she rejected flat out, so Musharraf goes to plan B - rig the election and elimination of elements going against his God-Complex over Pakistan.

[Marx]

UPDATE: BHUTTO'S SON STEPS INTO POLITICAL SPOTLIGHT ON ANNIVERSARY OF MOTHER'S ASSASSINATION
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/27/world/asia/pakistan-bhutto-anniversary/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

[Baramos]

Good for him, though I fear what will happen to him in that country. They already assassinated his mother, which to me was clearly an action on the part of the Pakistani government to maintain its control over their political system.