When MQM cried about extra-judicial killings, were you crying with them? If those people were killed after they had been arrested and before they were tried, then they have a legitimate gripe. If they were resisting arrest with violence , then they have no reason to cry, simple. I dont sympathise at all with any individual with guns who used them on the state. At the same time, that operation involved the killing/persecution of the group that MQM had its support base in, which is collective punishment, which I am against.
If there are sufficient parallels between Murtuza Bhutto and Bugti, then absolutely, killing him was OK in principle (though again procedural errors may have occurred). Like I said I do not know enough about the matter to say whether or not that is true.
If Saddam had a trial it was because when it came down to it, he did not resist arrest. He put his hands up, he didnt have guns on him and they took him in. Had he fired a single shot at those trying to arrest him, he would be gunned down before the court heard about him. Uday and Qusay did not have trials, Zarqawi did not have a trial. The moment a criminal (who hasnt been tried yet) fires at the law enforcement trying to capture him, he loses his right to complain.
So were you there when they went to arrrest bugti Bari maloomaat hai aap ko.
So tell me this, if the courts say the Bugti assasination was indeed a murder, would you respect their verdicts? No more long paras, just a yes or no will suffice.
You can beleive the Govt/Mush version, there is also an independent story which states that he died, not because of the army attack but because one of his own grenades exploded while he was hiding. Those people you mentioned, died outside, not in the caves.
Either way, unless you have some sort of vahi that lets you recollect events you did not witness, lets leave it upto the courts to figure it out, as there must be plenty of people on both sides that are still alive and can recollect the events.
You shouldnt doubt the courts either, because they are afterall being headed by the PCO judges, so if they pass a verdict in favor of Bugti's son, that would clearly bring out the truth.
Great, thats the best kind of comedic death the scumbag deserves.
Very admirable restraint you show. Unfortunately not before saying things like:
May I remind you that you are believing the Govt version of the story? There are also independent sources that say that one of his own grenades exploded while he was hiding..
Btw if you read Dawn’s story, it cites sources other than the government spokespeople.
And by the way, this is from your own wiki link With the success rate of our commandos in such operations, I wouldnt be surprised if this happened. Also, there was another mystery about his body. The Govt refused to let anyone open the coffin (they literally sealed it), with a 10-15 person janazah, without letting his family be there.
Given Akbar Bugti’s renowned stubbornness and non-compromising attitude, it is thought that Bugti or his associates detonated explosives in the case, killing all present inside, including the army negotiators and Akbar Bugti himself. Thus creating a legacy that Bugti was a ‘martyr’ for Baluch rights and freedom.
Ravage, would you show the same sentiments if Altaf Bhai is killed in an operation like that ?
[/quote]
haha.. run out of things to say spockie?
sure, if he had been killed in the operations back in the 90s resisting arrest, or resisting the state in future, I'd be fine with it. I am sure you would be too, but then again your opposition to the whole idea isnt based on principle is it?
About him killing himself with a grenade.. who gives a flying **** about that? If anything its the government view that offers bugti's son the remotest hope of any mud on Mush... not this alternate grenade self immolation theory.
About him killing himself with a grenade.. who gives a flying **** about that?.
No need to cry and resort to filth, and to answer your question, you do :) Now you were the one bringing up the 21 people who died right, so I showed to you, from your own link, how its thought he detonated the grenade with the negotiators inside.
The 21 people are only relevant in this thread to the extent of establishing whether or not he resisted the state when the state was trying to get him.
If he blasted himself up, and killed those people, then Bugti's son has no case. If those 21 people were killed during the operation, he was resisting the state, and got killed for good reason.
The 21 people are only relevant in this thread to the extent of establishing whether or not he resisted the state when the state was trying to get him.
If he blasted himself up, and killed those people, then Bugti's son has no case. If those 21 people were killed during the operation, he was resisting the state, and got killed for good reason.
Simple.
The self detonation theory is just 'one' of the several possibilities ravage! Who knows, the negotiators from the Govt side might be carrying a remote bomb, detonated from outside. Our Govt/Army are no angels either, and they were hiding his body remember. Thats what Im saying, lets have an inquiry into what happened, properly. This way the Baluch people who revere him as a hero will be given a proper answer.
The self detonation theory is just 'one' of the several possibilities ravage! Who knows, the negotiators from the Govt side might be carrying a remote bomb, detonated from outside. Our Govt/Army are no angels either, and they were hiding his body remember.
so we are now in the realm of speculation. it is possible that Govt also poisoned all the goats in South Waziristan leading to a shortage of mutton, who knows?
Until we have an actual basis for any of this remote bomb killing negotiators etc this is just a wildly speculative conspiracy theory.
[quote]
Thats what Im saying, lets have an inquiry into what happened, properly. This way the Baluch people who revere him as a hero will be given a proper answer.
[/QUOTE]
Sure, let us have this inquiry. Until something substantive emerges statements like "he was murdered" are groundless.
In the abstract, it is completely legal to kill someone rebelling violently against the state, without the court prounouncing a death penalty. This is what I got into this thread about.
also there is a very pragmatic reason for why the govt would want to hide his body. Not because he was killed by a grenade, I doubt the average public would be able to distinguish between death by a grenade thrown by the army or by bugti himself, I am sure the explosions would be quite similar regardless of the source. Visuals are much more powerful than words though. If bugti's dead face was plastered all over balochistan, you can bet the reaction would have been a hundredfold greater.
Given Akbar Bugti's renowned stubbornness and non-compromising attitude, it is thought that Bugti or his associates detonated explosives in the case, killing all present inside, including the army negotiators and Akbar Bugti himself. Thus creating a legacy that Bugti was a 'martyr' for Baluch rights and freedom.
everyone knows this is not true. what a pathetic attempt to hide the truth! must be same set of people who came up with the sun roof handle killed BB. just pathetic
In the abstract, it is completely legal to kill someone rebelling violently against the state, without the court prounouncing a death penalty. This is what I got into this thread about.
Lets go ahead and kill CJ Iftikhar, Aitezaz Ahsan, because uncle Mush thinks they were rebelling violently against the state! Some delusioned MQM supporters (one of them used to post here) were even blaming them for suicide attacks.
everyone knows this is not true. what a pathetic attempt to hide the truth! must be same set of people who came up with the sun roof handle killed BB. just pathetic
While I agree its not true, but the Baluchs will disagree with you and me. For them, Bugti was a hero, and a martyr, and for the latter we should thank Musharraf.
Lets go ahead and kill CJ Iftikhar, Aitezaz Ahsan, because uncle Mush thinks they were rebelling violently against the state!
If they actually were rebelling violently against the state, I would think uncle Mush was perfectly justified in killing them. To clarify, by violent rebellion i mean tactics like what BLA, MQM, Al Qaeda, Lal Masjid people etc employ, where they set up a parallel armed force to the government, and attack state forces and property.
[quote]
Some delusioned MQM supporters (one of them used to post here) were even blaming them for suicide attacks.
[/QUOTE]
Why is that relevant here? Debate that point the MQM supporter you are so fond of remembering.
If they actually were rebelling violently against the state, I would think uncle Mush was perfectly justified in killing them. To clarify, by violent rebellion i mean tactics like what BLA, MQM, Al Qaeda, Lal Masjid people etc employ, where they set up a parallel armed force to the government, and attack state forces and property.
Why is that relevant here? Debate that point the MQM supporter you are so fond of remembering.
Have you ever wondered why Bugti was all goody goody uptil 1999, and suddenly became a 'traitor'? He was one of the staunchest supporters of Jinnah and was a former Chief Minister not too long ago. I agree he had no right to challenge the writ of the Govt, but at the same time, the Govt had no right to just go all out and kill him. Thats how they made a martyr out of him. Lets just say the courts decide it was infact a murder, and Musharraf was guilty, phir kya ho ga, banda tu mar gya hai?
Have you ever wondered why Bugti was all goody goody uptil 1999, and suddenly became a 'traitor'? He was one of the staunchest supporters of Jinnah and was a former Chief Minister not too long ago.
i dont care why. possibly he wasnt paid enough for the Sui gas, possibly he was a principled leader for democracy.
He bombed pipelines and gas stations and attacked state employees then went and hid in a cave. Thats all that matters.
[quote]
I agree he had no right to challenge the writ of the Govt, but at the same time, the Govt had no right to just go all out and kill him. Thats how they made a martyr out of him.
[/quote]
The state had a right to go after him and kill him. It may not have been the best option, but it was a legal one.
[quote]
Lets just say the courts decide it was infact a murder, and Musharraf was guilty, phir kya ho ga, banda tu mar gya hai?
[/QUOTE]
Depends on what reasons they give. If it was a procedural issue, like falana form wasnt signed, then I agree with the court, but dont think it matters much, and it wouldnt amount to being called a murder. If it was a remote bomb that killed army personnel, then thats reprehensible, but that is completely speculative and groundless at the moment.
Bari maloomaat hai aap ko.