Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/12/27/pakistan.sharif/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/ asiapcf/12/27/pakistan.sharif/index.html</a> This headline was inevitable. As soon as she returned to Pakistan, you knew she was likely signng her death warrant, at least in my opinion. Apparently she stuck herself through the sunroof of a car she was in to wave at supporters during a parade rally and she took bullets in the chest, neck and head. Right after that, a suicide bomber on a motorcycle detonated himself next to her vehicle. This all comes after she was critical of Musharraf for not doing more to protect her from extremists (<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/11/04/bhutto/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/ asiapcf/11/04/bhutto/index.html</a>) The history of democracies are littered with martyrs like Bhutto, who seemingly act foolishly and expose themselves to the ultimate risk in an effort to reform their countries. It's hard to relate to that type of love of country anymore, much less imagine what it must be like to live in such a large, lawless environment that (ironically) is contained in a dictatorship. Bush's next step or two will be critical as Musharraf has been our best but shaky ally in the region and war on terror.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Agreed. When I heard this news this morning my first reaction was, gee...it took this long? The only thing that would surprise me less would be to find out that Brittany Spears got arrested again. It is a sad situation, but one that was completely and utterly predictable.
Originally Posted By SuperDry Just what we need - civil unrest in an Islamic country with nuclear weapons and a very underdeveloped notion of what democracy is.
Originally Posted By RC Collins Very sad, indeed. Whether you support or despise who we elect in the U.S., if you are an American, you should be glad we have an established system that smoothly transfers power. Although I disagree strongly with say, Senator Chuck Schumer, I'd rather he be Senator, duly elected by the voters, than someone whose positions I liked who got to the position through murder. Places like Pakistan and Darfur, I'm afraid, are the "natural" state of the human political world. It takes dedication and constant effort to obtain and keep and peaceful political process and society where one tribe doesn't work to wipe out the other. Terrorism is ugly.
Originally Posted By ecdc Equally predictable are the politically correct cries from Bush and others that these were "extremists" that carried out this plot. How many more times are we going to see these kinds of things happening in Muslim countries before it's no longer "extremists"? I really admired her for returning to Pakistan, even though it was essentially suicide. Maybe this can spark people recognizing that the so-called "extremists" are just that, and the more moderate people can start moving into the mainstream again and they can reclaim their countries and their religion from those that have hijacked it.
Originally Posted By DAR So I was just reading an article about countries around the world condemning the murder of Bhutto and came across this sentence: "The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously to condemn the killing." Really? The Security Council had to vote on whether the killing was bad? That just strikes me as something that should never even have to be voted on.
Originally Posted By BlueDevilSF >>you should be glad we have an established system that smoothly transfers power<< We do?
Originally Posted By DAR <<Maybe this can spark people recognizing that the so-called "extremists" are just that, and the more moderate people can start moving into the mainstream again and they can reclaim their countries and their religion from those that have hijacked it.>> Then why don't the more moderates of those countries along with the moderates of the Muslim faith take the lead in fighting these "extremists"? Could it be that their thought process isn't so far removed from the "extremists"? Something to consider.
Originally Posted By BlueDevilSF >>Yes we do.<< Instead we have a bunch of distrustful elected officials. It's a toss-up for me.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Instead we have a bunch of distrustful elected officials. It's a toss-up for me.<< Also, see Jeffrey Toobin's acclaimed book, "The Nine" for the inside (and disgusting) story on the Supreme Court appointing our President. I honestly didn't think too much about it and basically thought of the 2000 election as a tie until this account.
Originally Posted By DAR This is not directed towards you ecdc, but isn't it time that people started to let go of the 2000 election?
Originally Posted By DAR Off topic but ecdc this directed towards you. Did you get your Disneyland dvd for Christmas?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <This is not directed towards you ecdc, but isn't it time that people started to let go of the 2000 election?> I haven't read the book, but let's just say for argument's sake that the election was in effect stolen by 9 people. Should we just "let that go?" Or try to see to it that such a thing doesn't happen again?
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Off topic but ecdc this directed towards you. Did you get your Disneyland dvd for Christmas?<< I did, and I'm really enjoying them. But did I get a defective disc or is the main doc really filmed in widescreen but isn't anamorphic? Talk about bizarre...
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< I haven't read the book, but let's just say for argument's sake that the election was in effect stolen by 9 people. Should we just "let that go?" Or try to see to it that such a thing doesn't happen again? >>> I haven't read the book either, but your point is well taken. I think the biggest lesson to learn from 2000 is just how important it is to get the election right at the local level in the first place. If an election gets to the point where it has to be decided by a court, there's inevitably going to be differences of opinion and whatever side loses is going to claim that the other side "stole" the election. Elections are in their own category in that they don't lend themselves very well to judicial remedies after the fact.
Originally Posted By woody >>Should we just "let that go?" Or try to see to it that such a thing doesn't happen again?<< Yeah, How? Dump the Supreme Court?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 No, by tightening up local election laws and procedures so it never gets to them.
