Why read past the above nonsense in the first sentence.
I agree, the first sentence is a dead give away to the direction of the article. They just want to blame Bush any way that they can. Benazir Bhutto lived to return to Pakistan, getting the nod from Washington just fullfilled her dreams. I remember watching her on FOX and wondering what exactly her goals were.
One poster referred to the DU, so I decided to check it out. There is a taped interview with Bhutto, from November, where she mentions the name of a man who killed Bin Laden. Now, some lefty is claiming that “the Bush crime family” was involved in having Bin Laden murdered by Musharaff’s people and covered it up to prop up Musharaff.
Again, the circular logic of the left is astounding. First, Bush sent Bhutto to unseat Musharaff, and Bush was wasting time and men in Iraq instead of going after Bin Laden. Now, Bush was trying to prop up Musharaff and was covering up the death of Bin Laden.
I know the Guardian is a "leftist rag" and no real "conservative" would consult it but what if that part is true? Anybody have a source that disproves it? I do care about the truth insofar as it can be ascertained.
More at link, also lots of pictures and an obituary somewhere, says she attended Radcliffe, Harvard and Oxford.
By golly their search engine works better than most. The articles I read the other day aren't all on the front page any more.
"Benazir Bhutto's short-lived and ill-fated return to Pakistan was the result of a delicate deal with Musharraf, brokered by both the US and Britain. Bhutto had corruption charges against her dropped and in return her participation in the political process gave credibility to Musharraf's continued rule as president"