Former Pakistani PM Benazir Bhutto was killed this morning, being shot in the chest before a suicide bombing. Already, international leaders are sounding renewed support against "the terrorists," calling for maintenance of democracy, and "holding those responsible for justice."
US presidential candidates have put out their press releases, relaying their firm stance against terrorist bombings and support for democracy...I like democracy too.
And right-wing nutjob blowhards are already placing bets on the culpability of various Islamist groups/leftist conspirators.
No doubt, this will shake things up before January elections. So-called moderate candidates were already leery about running.
"Experts" name the most likely culprit to be Islamic militants, which wouldn't be surprising given Bhutto's rhetoric supporting the War on Terror and modernity before elections. With riots starting around the country and renewed calls by opposition to boycott the elections, who else would benefit as much?
President Bush restated his support for the Pakistani democratic process, blaming extremists. But could insensitivity of US policy be partly to blame?
Installment of a western-friendly puppet like Musharraf was a way to jab at already angry militant factions. And what about U.S. Pentagon arming of tribal groups against Al Qaeda? Maybe arming an angry group so that they'll serve US interests, even though they have no reason to want to do so besides economics, wasn't the best idea?
All in all, violent forms of Islam and western encroachment makes such travesties less shocking.