28/12/2007 / PAKISTAN
This
evidence needs to be examined carefully.
We must keep in mind that the authorities want to rule out any rumours that suggest
they were behind the attack, or at least that they did nothing to help avoid
it. If Bhutto was shot, then it would be the government's fault that she wasn't
properly protected. It's more difficult to get close to someone with a gun than
to let off a bomb. I don't think Musharraf is behind it all, of course, but I don't
see any real evidence that she wasn't killed with a bullet either. The video
doesn't convince me of that. And it's the same doctor yesterday who assured us that
she was wounded at the neck who tells us today that she had no wounds at all,
just a fractured skull. We'll wait and see, but let's not jump to any
conclusions."
What killed Benazir Bhutto?
The Pakistani Home Minister has just concluded a press conference in which he insisted that Benazir Bhutto was not killed by a bullet. He said that her skull was smashed when she tried to duck back into the vehicle to protect herself. The minister also said that he has evidence to prove that the attack was carried out by Al Qaida. Our Observer in Karachi, Zaheer Alam Kidvai, gives his reaction to the news.
Video of the attack broadcast this afternoon on Dawn TV
This
evidence needs to be examined carefully.
We must keep in mind that the authorities want to rule out any rumours that suggest
they were behind the attack, or at least that they did nothing to help avoid
it. If Bhutto was shot, then it would be the government's fault that she wasn't
properly protected. It's more difficult to get close to someone with a gun than
to let off a bomb. I don't think Musharraf is behind it all, of course, but I don't
see any real evidence that she wasn't killed with a bullet either. The video
doesn't convince me of that. And it's the same doctor yesterday who assured us that
she was wounded at the neck who tells us today that she had no wounds at all,
just a fractured skull. We'll wait and see, but let's not jump to any
conclusions."Contributors
»
Sign up via 
The Observers TV show
Observers' Tips
What we’re working on now...
Most popular
Comments
Al QAIDA denies
Submitted by Mina (not verified) on Sat, 29/12/2007 - 20:39.It seems that AL Qaida denies being implicated in the assassination. So I guess Zaheer is right. Let's not jump to any conclusion. The security services mauy be involved.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071229/ap_on_re_as/pakistan;_ylt=Apjmo49GpI...
Unregistered user
It seems pretty obvious to
Submitted by Nat (not verified) on Sat, 29/12/2007 - 08:11.It seems pretty obvious to me that Al Qaida did this. Why being so cautious mr Zaheer? Do you really think Musharraf could have helped the islamists do that?
Unregistered user
Obvious?
Submitted by Zaheer on Tue, 01/01/2008 - 07:35.I am not being 'cautious' at all, Nat. In Politics, as far as I have gleaned, there are no patterns for prediction. Everyone changes from Enemy to Friend and back in the blinking of an eye. Sleeping with the enemy was always part of politics, as the age-old adage "Politics makes strange bedfellows" aptly states.
I do not think Musharraf's government or the Al Qaeda can ever be ruled out. I just do not buy the entire 'official' version - but it could contain some truths.
What I do know - for certain - is that we will never know! So I can only give my skeptical analysis, while others may claim to offer an 'expert' answer ... but, as Gannon said: "Where facts are few, experts are many."
Zaheer