Aftermath News

Was the DC Madam murdered to protect high officials in the US Government? Four out of four commentors on Fox News seem to agree.

Fox News: Alex Jones on DC Madam Palfrey’s Murder

Telegraph | Apr 9, 2008

By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter

Gordon Brown has put pressure on Mohamed Fayed not to challenge the findings of the inquest into the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, saying he does not want to see a “re-run” of the six-month hearing.

Mr Fayed maintains that the Princess was murdered by MI6 and does not accept the inquest jury’s verdict that she was killed unlawfully through the gross negligence of the paparazzi who followed her car before it crashed in 1997 and of its driver, Henri Paul.

The Harrods boss, who is unhappy that the coroner did not give the jury the option of deciding that the Princess and his son Dodi died in a “staged” accident, spent Tuesday in talks with lawyers “to see if there’s anything more that can be done”.

He refused to rule out applying for the verdicts to be set aside and a new inquest held, but the Prime Minister said it was time to “draw a line” under the tragedy.

He said: “I think the Princes, William and Harry, have spoken for the whole country when they say it is time to bring this to an end.

“I believe also that our security services, who have co-operated with the inquiry to the fullest, have or would continue to be diverted from the important work they do if we had to have another re-run of this. So I think it’s important we draw a line.”

The former bodyguard Trevor Rees, the sole survivor of the crash in the Alma tunnel in Paris, also called on Mr Fayed to give up his legal fight, saying: “I agree with the jury’s verdict, and welcome the end of the inquest process. I hope that this now represents a point from which everyone involved can move on.”

Mr Rees was singled out for praise by Princes William and Harry in a statement which followed Monday’s verdicts. They thanked him for giving evidence despite the “painful” memories it would have brought back for him.

Asked about Mr Rees’s requests for people to “move on”, Mr Fayed said: “Don’t you think I do? Don’t you think I do? This last six months has been like going through a very, very dark tunnel and the whole of the last 10 years has been terrible.

“Of course we all want to move on but I think there can be no untied up loose ends, but all we’re doing today is trying to see if there is anything more that can be done.”

Mr Fayed had said under oath at the inquest that he would accept the jury’s verdicts, but his spokesman said he made that promise before the coroner barred the jury from considering the possibility that MI6 agents staged the accident.

His spokesman, Katharine Witty, said Mr Fayed was aware of the Prime Minister’s comments but would continue to reflect on the verdicts with his lawyers, possibly for several days.

“He is well aware that there is pressure to draw a line under this, and he takes that seriously,” she said.

“But he has to do what he thinks is right.”

Lord Justice Scott Baker had specifically instructed the jurors to reject conspiracy theories that the accident was staged.

Telegraph | Apr 8, 2008

Diana inquest: William and Harry welcome verdict after jury blames paparazzi and Paul

By Gordon Rayner and Andrew Pierce

Princes William and Harry were hoping last night that 10 years of speculation over the death of their mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, would finally end after a jury decided that she was unlawfully killed.

After six months of extraordinary claims and counter-claims, the inquest jury decided that the paparazzi who pursued the Princess’s car through Paris and its driver Henri Paul, who had been drinking, were both to blame for the crash because of their “gross negligence”.

Sources close to the Princes said they were “optimistic” that the verdict would draw a line under the countless conspiracy theories about the accident in 1997. “They just want it to end after all this time,” a source said.

In a statement issued by Clarence House last night, the Princes said they agreed with the verdict and thanked witnesses who had given evidence that had “in many cases reawakened their painful and personal memories”.

Trevor Rees, the former bodyguard who survived the crash despite suffering severe injuries, was singled out for praise and the Princes expressed their “profound gratitude” to the medical staff who fought in vain to save their mother’s life.

By a majority of 9-2, the jury at the Royal Courts of Justice in London returned verdicts of unlawful killing on both the Princess and her boyfriend Dodi Fayed - the equivalent of manslaughter in a criminal court.
advertisement

It means that after two exhaustive investigations, and with an estimated £10 million of taxpayers’ money spent on the unprecedented inquest, the blame has once again been attached to the very people who were accused within minutes of the Princess being declared dead.

But the paparazzi - 10 of whom were arrested after the crash - will not face fresh legal proceedings in France, as a police investigation there cleared them of any criminal responsibility, a decision that was upheld on appeal. Yesterday’s verdicts were rejected by Mohamed Fayed, who maintained that Princess Diana and his son Dodi were “murdered” by MI6 on the orders of the Duke of Edinburgh.

Last night, a poll suggested that almost a third of Britons still agree with him, despite the coroner, Lord Justice Scott Baker, declaring that there was “not a shred of evidence” in support of the conspiracy theories.

The survey for BBC2’s Newsnight showed that although 62 per cent of people believed the crash was simply a tragic accident, 31 per cent thought there was “something suspicious” about it. Only 19 per cent thought the estimated £10 million the inquest cost the taxpayer was money well spent.

Rosa Monckton, one of the Princess’s closest friends and a witness at the inquest, said she hoped the public would now remember Diana for her “extraordinary” work with hospices and children’s charities and not simply the “sordid six weeks” she spent with the Fayed family before her death.

“What I really very much hope is that people will eventually forget [this] and if they do remember then that they also remember that this was only six weeks out of her life.

“I think that has been forgotten because the focus has been on only six weeks of a truly extraordinary life. I think it has been incredibly intrusive. Much of her life has come into the public domain which should never have been there.”

Princess Diana, who was 36, and Dodi Fayed, 41, died after the Mercedes S280 in which they were travelling ran head-on into a pillar in the central reservation of the Alma underpass in Paris, a blackspot.

Following six months of evidence from more than 250 witnesses, the jury decided that the couple were unlawfully killed through a combination of the gross negligence of Henri Paul, who was speeding and was more than three times the French drink-drive limit, and the paparazzi.

Full Story

For related articles on the death of Princess Diana - Click Here

Lord Mishcon: The lawyer recorded Princess Diana’s claim she would die in a car crash

Daily Mail | Jan 15, 2008

Princess Diana foretold her own violent death two years before the Paris car crash, the inquest heard today.

At a meeting in October 1995 with her divorce solicitors she set out her fears which were recorded in what has become known as the “Mischon Note”.

The late Lord Mischon, then a senior figure in law firm Mischon De Reya, made notes of the meeting attended by the Princess and solicitors Maggie Rae and Sandra Davies.

Diana told him: “The Queen would abdicate by the next April, she (Diana) would be involved in a car accident which would at the very least render her so ‘injured or damaged as to be declared unbalanced,’ there was a conspiracy to put aside the Princess and the then Camilla Parker Bowles and royal nanny Tiggy Legge Bourke had had an abortion and she (Diana) would shortly have a document to prove it.”

Lord Mischon recorded in his note that he personally did not believe her life was in danger.

He warned the Princess that if she was in fear she should take extra security measures, particularly in relation to any car she got into.

But the lawyer was surprised that Diana’s private secretary Patrick Jephson “half believed” she was right.

Two weeks after the Paris car crash in which Diana and Dodi Fayed were killed with driver Henri Paul, Lord Mischon took his notes to then Met Commissioner Lord Condon and they both agreed that confidentiality should be maintained.

Police and lawyers only passed the Mischon Note to royal coroner Michael Burgess when details were revealed of Diana’s similar fears by her former butler Paul Burrell in 2003.

Solicitor Sandra Davis, from Mishcon De Reya, who represented the Princess during her divorce from Prince Charles, said Diana told her on more than one occasion that she thought “they” were going to kill her.

When asked by Michael Mansfield QC if Diana ever told her who “they” were, she replied: “No”.

Miss Davis said Diana told her she had somebody “on the inside” who was giving her the information.

When asked if the Princess was “deadly serious” about her fears, Miss Davis said: “She was.”

Miss Davis said that when she heard of Diana’s death, her mind “jumped” to what was said at thatmeeting on 30 October 1995, when Diana had expressed her fears for her life.

She also confirmed Lord Mishcon, her former boss, was sufficiently concerned that he took the so-called “Mishcon note” to police immediately after Diana’s crash in Paris.

Telegraph | Jan 16, 2008

By Gordon Rayner

Diana, Princess of Wales told her solicitors of a plot to tamper with her car so it would crash and “get rid of her” or leave her “unbalanced”, the inquest into her death heard.

A note of the meeting, written by Lord Mishcon, head of the law firm Mishcon de Reya, was given to senior Scotland Yard officers after she was killed in a Paris car crash in 1997. But they did not pass on the document to their French counterparts.

The note’s existence was only revealed six years later, after the Princess’s former butler, Paul Burrell, published a letter in which the Princess made a similar claim.

Michael Mansfield QC, representing Mohamed Fayed, whose son Dodi died alongside the Princess, suggested to Sir David Veness, a former Metropolitan Police commander, that his officers had buried the note because he knew that “the security services or agents of the British state” had murdered the Princess “and you didn’t want this investigated”.

In a heated exchange, Sir David described the suggestion of a cover-up as “reprehensible” and “rejected completely” any suggestion that the Princess was murdered.

Mohamed Fayed believes his son and the Princess were killed by MI6 on the orders of the Duke of Edinburgh to prevent them marrying.

Diana’s fears o being ‘put aside’

The Princess raised her fears about an assassination plot during a meeting with Lord Mishcon and two of his staff, Maggie Rae and Sandra Davis, at Kensington Palace in October 1995.

Lord Mishcon, who was then ill and has since died, visited the Princess to introduce her to the two partners who were to take over her legal work from him.

Lord Mishcon was so concerned about what the Princess said that he made a full note of the conversation, which was read to the jury at the Royal Courts of Justice in London. He wrote: “Her Royal Highness said she had been informed by reliable sources that:

A: The Queen would be abdicating in April and the Prince of Wales would then be assuming the throne.

B: Efforts would then be made, if not to get rid of her, be it by some accident in her car, such as pre-prepared brake failure or whatever, between now and then, at least to see that she was so injured or damaged as to be declared ‘unbalanced’.

“She was convinced that there was a conspiracy and that she and Camilla Parker Bowles were to be put aside.

“She had also been told that (Tiggy) Legge Bourke (the former royal nanny whom Princess Diana believed Prince Charles wanted to marry) had been operated on for an abortion and that she, HRH, would soon be in receipt of ‘a certificate’. “I told HRH that if she really believed her life was being threatened, security measures, including those on her car, must be increased.”

Lord Mishcon set up a meeting with the Princess’s private secretary, Patrick Jephson, who said he “half believed” what the Princess said.

Miss Rae told the court: “It was very clear in my own mind that she thought she was going to be killed.”

But she admitted the lawyers did not take the Princess’s fears entirely seriously and did not inform the police at the time.

How police ’sat on’ the note

Lord Mishcon arranged to meet Lord Condon, the then Metropolitan Police Commissioner, and Sir David Veness, assistant commissioner for specialist operations, on Sept 18, 1997, less than three weeks after the fatal car crash.

Lord Mishcon handed over his note of the 1995 meeting but it was not passed on to French police. Matters went no further until October 2003, when the Princess’s note to Mr Burrell also referring to fears of a staged car crash, appeared in a newspaper.

Sir David came under intense questioning by Mr Mansfield over why the note was kept secret.

Mr Mansfield said: “It didn’t need Sherlock Holmes, you don’t need to be experienced in the job, that once Lord Mishcon walks through the door on the 18th of September, you knew that this was relevant, didn’t you?”

Sir David said the note was “potentially relevant” but there was no evidence at the time that the crash was anything more than a tragic accident.

He said the three men had agreed that the note “would be treated in the utmost confidence because any leakage could do immeasurable harm and cause needless pain… Lord Mishcon’s concern was above all for the royal princes”.

He added: “We decided to monitor the French investigation and if any suspicious factors emerged then we would review the position.”

Mr Mansfield said: “Were you just sitting on this note because you knew full well that the security services or agents of the British state, maverick or otherwise, had been involved and you didn’t want this investigated?” Sir David said he “rejected completely” that suggestion and described as “reprehensible” any implication that he was involved in a cover-up.

In her note to Mr Burrell, written in October 1995 or 1996, the Princess said: “My husband is planning an accident in my car, brake failure and serious head injury.

” The day after its publication, Lord Mishcon contacted the police to remind them of his own note, which was immediately passed to the coroner in charge of the inquests.

Mr Mansfield said to Sir David: “I’m going to put it to you bluntly: this note would never have seen the light of day unless Paul Burrell had published his (note) and you suddenly all realised you’ve got a problem?”

Sir David said: “No. With regard to the future hearings there would have been a review and it would have been pertinent to consider it in any discussions with the coroner.”

The coroner, Lord Justice Scott Baker, asked whether it had been relevant to Sir David that: “Since the note had been written in October 1995 the Queen hadn’t abdicated, Camilla hadn’t been put aside, and until the tragic collision in August 1997, neither had Diana?

Sir David said: “Yes, that was of relevance.”

Did police try to stop the Fayed holiday?

Mr Mansfield suggested that the police had become aware of the Princess’s plans to go on holiday in July 1997 with Mohamed Fayed, who was under investigation over an alleged safety deposit break-in at Harrods and that the police wanted to keep the Princess away from him.

An officer under Sir David’s command informed the Queen of the Princess’s plans, but the Queen already knew. Mr Mansfield put it to Sir David that “there was a desire to keep the Princess away from Mr Fayed and when she refused, things got really hot”. Sir David denied this.

The Princess’s ‘lonely’ life

Miss Rae said she felt the Princess led a “lonely” life and felt “outgunned” by Prince Charles during their divorce proceedings of 1995 to 1996.

“I thought that she lived in a very odd environment,” she said. “I thought she was quite lonely.

“One weekend she told me about she had been alone in this rather lonely set of apartments (in Kensington Palace), she had heated her own food in the microwave, I got the impression that she was a bit lonely.”

During the divorce, she said “she felt she was up against a big machine.

“Prince Charles had a big staff and she had a very small staff and she did feel outgunned”.

Musharraf says Bhutto’s death was her own fault

MarketWatch | Jan 5, 2008

BOSTON (MarketWatch) — Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf said in an interview to be broadcast Sunday on CBS’s “60 Minutes” that assassinated former prime minister Benazir Bhutto is responsible for her own death for standing up in a security car.

“For standing up outside the car, I think it was she to blame alone. Nobody else. Responsibility is hers,” Musharraf said, according to a press release Saturday from CBS.

In the wake of the assassination of opposition leader Bhutto, the Pakistani government this week announced it would postpone the national election scheduled for Tuesday until February. Bhutto was a former prime minister who returned from exile to lead her Pakistan People’s Party in parliamentary elections.

The party has called on the United Nations to investigate the killing, which the government has attributed to al-Qaeda sympathizers. Some opposition figures have said that the government bears responsibility for the assassination.

It’s still unclear exactly what killed Bhutto. A bomb exploded near her car as she stood up inside the security vehicle with her head visible through a roof hatch. The government of Pakistan initially said Bhutto was killed when she hit her head as result of the concussion from the bomb explosion. Video images also show a gunman in the car’s vicinity, but it’s not certain if Bhutto was shot.
Asked by “60 Minutes” if he believes a gunshot could be the cause of Bhutto’s head injury, Musharraf replied it was a likely possibility.

Musharraf also said in the interview that the government did everything possible to provide Bhutto with the security she required.

. . .

Click here for related articles

Pakistani lawyers demonstrate against President Pervez Musharraf in Lahore, Pakistan, Wednesday. Pakistani elections will be delayed until Feb. 18 because of violence following the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, authorities said Wednesday, ignoring threatened street protests by opposition parties.

USA TODAY | Jan 1, 2008

By Paul Wiseman and Zafar M. Sheikh

GUJAR KHAN, Pakistan — Pakistan’s opposition is convinced that President Pervez Musharraf plans to steal the upcoming election — or at least shield his party from the wrath of voters.

“The deck is loaded. The whole system is rigged,” says Husain Haqqani, former adviser to slain opposition leader Benazir Bhutto.

A rigged election could send angry voters into the streets, undermine U.S. hopes for Pakistan’s transition to full-fledged democracy and destabilize a nuclear-armed country struggling to contain Taliban and al-Qaeda militants.

“The stakes are very high,” says Sheila Fruman of the National Democratic Institute, a non-partisan, U.S. government-funded group that promotes democracy.

The latest reason for suspicion: The Election Commission on Wednesday postponed next week’s parliamentary elections to Feb. 18, saying ballots and polling stations were burned in the rioting that followed Bhutto’s killing Dec. 27. The new parliament will pick a prime minister to run the government with Musharraf.

Bhutto’s Pakistan Peoples Party, expecting a wave of sympathy votes, suspects the delay is designed to give Musharraf’s ruling party time to stage a comeback. “The Election Commission has shown its subservience to Pervez Musharraf,” says Latif Khosa, a Peoples Party senator who compiled a 143-page report alleging government efforts to rig the elections.

Musharraf, the former army chief who seized power in a coup in 1999, went on national television Wednesday to reassure the Pakistani public that the delay was “inevitable” given the damage to the country’s electoral machinery.

“The next election will be free, fair, transparent and peaceful,” he said.

Musharraf also announced that Scotland Yard will help investigate Bhutto’s assassination, reversing his initial rejection of foreign help after he came under pressure to allow a U.N. probe.

But doubts have been piling up about:

•The Election Commission. Khosa’s report says the electoral watchdog — whose two commissioners signed an oath of loyalty to the Musharraf government — has ignored hundreds of complaints and pleas for changes. For instance, the report says, the commission did nothing to reinstate millions of voters stricken from the rolls until ordered to do so by the Pakistani Supreme Court.

The commission has refused to publish a list of polling stations — a step necessary to prevent the “ghost” polling stations that mysteriously produce unexpected votes, Fruman says. The commission outraged the opposition last month by banning former prime minister Nawaz Sharif and his brother, Shahbaz, from running for office.

“The government was very keen to keep the Sharif brothers out of this election,” says Ahmed Bilal Mehboob, executive director of the Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency.

•The courts. Musharraf purged independent judges when he declared a state of emergency Nov. 3. He didn’t reinstate them after ending emergency rule Dec. 15. That raises questions, Fruman says, because the courts “are the final appeal body for election complaints.”

•The caretaker government. The sitting government resigned in mid-November to give way to a government that is supposed to be neutral during the campaign. Khosa’s report found that several caretaker ministers had a conflict of interest: They — or their relatives — were running in the upcoming election.

•The media. During the six-week state of emergency, Musharraf ordered independent TV stations off the air. He let them broadcast only if they agreed not to air live campaign events, interview candidates on talk shows or criticize state institutions such as the army. “The press is in chains,” says human rights activist Hina Jilani.

•Local governments. Most of the complaints the Election Commission receive involve the meddling of local government officials, known as nazims, in the campaign. Elections in 2005 empowered nazims loyal to Musharraf and the ruling party. Two years ago, the International Crisis Group, a conflict resolution think tank, reported that Musharraf’s government “rigged local elections … to dominate forthcoming parliamentary elections.”

The nazims are “campaigning for their near and dear ones with all the paraphernalia at their disposal — police, vehicles, development projects,” Khosa says.

In this dusty town 35 miles southeast of the capital Islamabad, the son of a powerful nazim is running as the ruling party’s candidate against a Peoples Party incumbent. “The nazim is throwing up electricity poles and saying there will be power after the election,” complains Yamin Qureshi, campaign manager for the Peoples Party candidate. “People say, ‘We don’t have water. We don’t have roads.’ He says, ‘Done.’ “

Last week, workers started widening the main thoroughfare and covering an ugly drainage ditch along the curb in what Qureshi sees as a campaign ploy.

“Of course, they’re lying,” counters Ishiaq Chaudhry, a ruling party supporter and friend of the nazim. The projects have nothing to with the election, he says; they were approved months earlier.

Fruman says the Election Commission could use the six-week reprieve to respond to complaints “to build confidence and show they are impartial,” she says. “This is their last chance.”

For related articles on the Bhutto assassination click here

Last moment: Bhutto emerged through the sunroof of her car, a minute later she lay dying

Daily Mail | Dec 30, 2007

By SIMON WALTERS

Benazir Bhutto claimed three senior allies of Pakistan’s president General Musharraf were out to kill her in a secret email to Foreign Secretary David Miliband written weeks before her death.

Astonishingly, one of them is a leading intelligence officer who was officially responsible for protecting Miss Bhutto from an assassination.

The second is a prominent Pakistani figure, one of whose family members was allegedly murdered by a militant group run by Miss Bhutto’s brother. The third is a well-known chief minister in Pakistan who is a long-standing opponent of Miss Bhutto.

Miss Bhutto told Mr Miliband she was convinced that the three were determined to assassinate her on her return to the country and pleaded with him to put pressure on the Pakistan government to stop them.

The disclosure is bound to lead to questions as to whether the Foreign Office did enough to safeguard Miss Bhutto.

Her return was organised in close co-ordination with the UK and US governments, which saw her as the best hope of restoring democracy in Pakistan while preventing it from falling into the hands of Islamic extremists.

The email concerning the three alleged would-be killers identified by Miss Bhutto emerged as rival political factions in Pakistan continued to dispute the details surrounding her assassination.

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/12_04/Bhuttogun3_468×280.jpg
Seconds before the killing the alleged gunman (circled in red) takes aim in the crowd

The Pakistan government said she was killed by Al Qaeda, but her People’s Party dismissed that as “a pack of lies” and insisted General Musharraf’s regime was implicated.

Wajid Shamsul Hasan, Pakistan’s former High Commissioner to the UK and a British-based adviser to Miss Bhutto, said: “She sent an email to the Foreign Office before she returned to Pakistan naming certain people.

“In the email, she said, ‘The following persons are planning to murder me and if any harm comes to me they should be held responsible.’”

Miss Bhutto wrote her prophetic email to Mr Miliband in September, shortly after she met him to discuss her return to Pakistan. She named the same three individuals in a letter to General Musharraf in October.

The Mail on Sunday has been informed of the names but has decided not to publish them.

One is a senior intelligence officer and retired army officer who worked for Pakistan’s sinister Inter Services Intelligence spy agency, which has close links to the Taliban and has been involved in drug smuggling and political assassinations. He allegedly directed two Islamic terrorist groups and reportedly once boasted that he could pay money to hired killers to assassinate anyone who posed a threat to Musharraf’s regime.

He was given another senior intelligence post by Musharraf after his bid to become a senior overseas diplomat for Pakistan failed when the host country refused to let him in because of his past activities.

He was also linked to Omar Sheikh, the former British public schoolboy convicted of kidnapping US journalist Daniel Pearl, who was murdered in 2002 by having his throat cut and being decapitated by Islamic terrorists.

The second individual named by Miss Bhutto is well known in Pakistani political circles and has been involved in a vicious family feud with her for decades.

One of his relatives was said to have been murdered by the militant Al Zulfiqar group run by Miss Bhutto’s brother, Murtaza. The organisation was set up to avenge the execution of Miss Bhutto’s father Zulfiqar Bhutto by ex-Pakistan dictator Zia ul Haq.

The third individual is a chief minister who has repeatedly denounced Miss Bhutto - and faced political annihilation if she won the elections scheduled for next week. He made an outspoken attack on her only hours before her death.

A senior source said: “She knew the risk she was taking when she decided to go back but also took the precaution of informing the British Government of the names of those she thought presented the biggest danger to her.

“She hoped Mr Miliband would use his influence with General Musharraf to remove certain people from positions where they were able to plot against her. She gave the same names to General Musharraf but she knew there was only a limited possibility of any action being taken.

“She had to rely on Mr Musharraf and countries such as Britain and America, who supported her return and have close connections with Mr Musharraf’s government, to take her concerns seriously.

“Events have shown she was right to be worried. If any of the three people she named turn out to have been involved in this assassination, there will be serious repercussions.”

The Mail on Sunday has also learned that after an earlier attempt to assassinate her in October, the Foreign Office told Miss Bhutto to stop making wild allegations against Musharraf - or face greater danger.

A Foreign Office spokesman said: “Miss Bhutto had a series of meetings with the Foreign Secretary and other officials. She raised her concerns about particular people and we raised them in turn with the authorities in Pakistan and asked them to put in place more strict security measures to protect her.”

. . .

Related

Bhutto murder blamed on Pakistan intelligence agents

Hillary: Pakistan troops might have killed Bhutto

Al-Qaeda strongly denies role in Bhutto assassination

Anglo-American Ambitions behind the Assassination of Benazir Bhutto and the Destabilization of Pakistan

Bhutto party accuses government

Islamists within ISI may have aided Benazir assassination, analysts fear

Bhutto said she would hold Musharraf ‘responsible’ for her death

‘Surge’ Of US Special Forces Expected In Pakistan In Early 2008

Did Pakistan’s ISI Kill Benazir Bhutto?

Fulcrum of Evil ISI - CIA - Al Qaeda Nexus

Guardian Unlimited | Jan 2, 2008

Julian Borger in Islamabad and Mark Tran

Gordon Brown today agreed to send a police team from Scotland Yard to Pakistan to help investigate the assassination of the opposition leader Benazir Bhutto.

The Pakistani president, Pervez Musharraf, requested specialist help as serious doubts continued over the government’s version of events surrounding her death.

“We would like to know what were the reasons that led to the martyrdom of Benazir Bhutto. I would also like to look into it,” Musharraf said in a televised address.

The exact circumstances of the killing have been shrouded in confusion. Opposition officials have rejected government claims into how she died and called for an international investigation.

David Miliband, the foreign secretary, said a team from Scotland Yard is due to leave Britain this week.

“As the terrible events of last week show only too clearly, Pakistan faces a very serious threat from extremism,” Miliband said.

“The UK is already closely engaged with the government of Pakistan on counter-terrorism cooperation. The prime minister and President Musharraf have agreed to further deepen this aspect of our relationship, and officials will travel to Pakistan to take this forward.”

In his first major speech since the Bhutto killing, Musharraf appealed for reconciliation.

“The nation has experienced a great tragedy. Benazir Bhutto has died in the hands of terrorists. I pray to God almighty to put the eternal soul of Benazir at peace,” he said.

Following Bhutto’s death, rioters rampaged through the streets, burning cars and shops, accusing the government of complicity. The government has strongly rejected the accusation and has blamed al-Qaida for her death.

Musharraf also said he had wanted to hold parliamentary elections as scheduled on January 8, but he deferred to the election commission which formally announced earlier in the day to postpone them for six weeks until February 18.

“The election commission has taken a timely and correct decision,” the president said. “We will hold free, fair, transparent and peaceful elections.”

The election commission blamed riots in the wake of Bhutto’s assassination for the delay, saying 11 of the commission’s district offices had been damaged or destroyed, along with ballot boxes and other election material, particularly in Sindh province, the base of Bhutto’s Pakistan Peoples party (PPP).

Another factor behind the delay was the Shia holy month of Muharram, which is due to begin next week and last a lunar month. The celebration by Pakistan’s Shia minority has in the past triggered sectarian tensions.

The decision to delay the vote was quickly condemned by opposition parties, who branded it a ploy by the government, fearful of a sympathy vote for the Bhutto family.

But the PPP’s central executive committee decided it would contest the election despite misgivings.

The other major political party, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), led by former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, is also meeting to decide upon its response, saying it would seek to form a common front with the PPP.

A party spokesman, Ahsan Iqbal, said: “We will try to continue to make all parties join hands to force Musharraf from office and set up a neutral caretaker government.”

Despite the threat of further street violence, western diplomats and political observers in Islamabad predicted that the opposition parties would try to restrain the reaction of their followers, aware that undecided voters would blame them for further political instability.

The riots have largely subsided, but the political atmosphere remains volatile.

Some western officials argue that the delay in the vote might ultimately prove to be beneficial, if the time is used to establish safeguards to improve the transparency and credibility of the elections.

“It is vital that the government of Pakistan makes full use of the extended period before elections are held to ensure that all necessary arrangements are put in place so that they are transparent and fair,” Miliband said.

“I hope all parties will participate in the elections, that media freedom will be extensive and that all political prisoners are released.”

An EU observer mission had said it would not be able to field a full team if the elections had gone ahead, as scheduled, on January 8.

There are widespread fears that civil war would erupt if the election were perceived as rigged.

Benazir Bhutto Assassination Video

New video appears to show Bhutto being shot

Daily Times | Jan 1, 2008

NYT report asks why crime scene, BB’s car were cleaned up before investigation

By Khalid Hasan

Washington: With accounts of the cause of Benazir Bhutto’s death shifting from bullet wounds to the bombing that followed the gunfire, it’s too early to discount the possibility that the assassin, or assassins, got some help from Pakistan’s many official reservoirs of extremist Islamist sympathy, writes Roger Cohen in the New York Times on Monday.

He finds it suspicious that both the crime scene and Benazir’s car were cleaned up before investigators had access. Supporting Senator Hillary Clinton’s call for an international inquiry, he asks, “How can Musharraf, who showed his contempt for an independent judiciary by dissolving the Supreme Court in November, oversee a credible investigation? It should be accompanied by a US Congressional inquiry into post-9/11 American policy toward Pakistan,” he suggests. The United States, out of misplaced deference to Musharraf, failed to secure Benazir the protection she was demanding, he points out.

Her husband, Asif Zardari, visited the United States shortly before her death to plead for help, but was denied the meetings he sought at the top levels of the State Department. Similarly, the Bush administration failed to pressure Musharraf to accept Benazir family demands for FBI involvement in the investigation of the attempted assassination of Benazir on October 18. Cohen believes that years of strong economic growth have expanded a Pakistani middle class that wants democracy’s rule of law. Radical Islamist parties constitute a minority and democratic forces outweigh the theocratic.

“A discredited Musharraf can do nothing for Pakistan without credible elections. Credibility requires international monitors or a transitional arrangement allowing all major parties to participate in the vote’s organisation. The election should be held on or as soon as possible after January 8. A large sympathy vote for Benazir’s Pakistan Peoples Party is likely.

Benazir’s loss, he adds, is devastating. Her Kennedy-like family tragedy leaves the fathomless void of what might have been. Cohen, who was with Benazir at Oxford, concludes with a tribute: “Of grace and conviction her unusual fusion of East and West was formed. Only Pakistani democracy can avenge, in part, the disappearance of the rare bridge she offered and offset the American mistakes that led to this loss.”

. . .

Related

The Benazir Bhutto dossier: ‘secret service was diverting US aid for fighting militants to rig the elections’

Bhutto sought to reveal damning allegations against Pakistan’s intelligence agencies