Bhutto’s assassin’s pistol type?
- Thread starter lbmii
- Start date
- Status
Thin Black Line
Member
This just gets more interesting all the time:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d2a_1199047237
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cc5_1199082040
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d2a_1199047237
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cc5_1199082040
Creature
Member
Anyway...looks like a more like a Tokarev to me.
SDC
Member
One of the latest videos released of this shows that there were likely TWO assassins, one armed with a pistol, and the other armed with a bomb (apparently to "make sure" this time, since they missed her with a bomb right after she got back to Pakistan). The differing stories (at least 3, as of now) simply show that each faction in this has got a reason for putting out a different story; some people say she was shot, some people say she was killed by shrapnel, and the government of Pakistan says she died of of a skull fracture. Since she's already been buried, I doubt we'll ever get the TRUE story, one way or the other. When I saw the shot of a pistol on the news, I thought "S&W Sigma", but I could also see how it may be a Steyr.
Creature
Member
For the life of me, I cant see what all the fuss is about regarding whether whether a bullet or the explosion killed her...either way, she was still assassinated.
Wes Janson
Member
- Joined
- May 12, 2006
- Messages
- 1,962
Well, if nothing else it's an interesting point for the 9mm crowd, as the video and subsequent government interference would seem to suggest she died from one or more rounds to the neck.
One has to wonder if the shooter knew about the bomber behind him...did he go into it expecting to escape? Or were they both expecting to die, and simply working together to assure they succeeded?
One has to wonder if the shooter knew about the bomber behind him...did he go into it expecting to escape? Or were they both expecting to die, and simply working together to assure they succeeded?
There is many what if scenarios. The assassin with the gun might not have even known the other assassin was going to blow them both up afterwards.
There is many theories you could come up for that. Perhaps the shooter was an agent of some sort and a good marksman or just a recruited extremist, and others involved had a suicide bomber go along to insure he would not survive for interogation where more facts could be uncovered.
He might have not even known he would be blown to pieces after firing those shots.
The ISI is very murky, and very effective. They are one of the best intelligence agencies in the world.
As the article by Ralph Peters demonstrates (though i don't agree with his opinions, the article is based on fact) shows she was far from a saint, and made Pakistan slide in reverse when she was in charge.
Rogue elements wanting to do "what is best for the country" may indeed have collaborated to create a complicated assassination to keep the nation on the "right path". Recruiting a radical bomber to the cause to help cover up evidence and insure nobody involved survived to be interogated seems fairly logical.
Then again it could just as easily actualy been lone "extremists" who she promised to attack when she got into power and they simply made a pre-emptive strike.
There is a great many possibilities, and every side has a reason to make people think another side is responsible for the assassination.
If she was indeed shot, and the official report said she was not, why would that be? Perhaps the bullet that struck her wouldn't match the type of pistol or caliber the documented assassin had, or perhaps they think forensics will tell the difference between the same caliber coming from a suppressed carbine from afar and a pistol from up close.
There is a great many possibilities, and only one truth. Will it be the truth that history documents? Who knows.
Many people still feel the Kennedy assassination went into the history books wrong.
It will likely remain one of those conspiracy theories for a long time to come. Conspiracy theories are just that, theories, some are right, many are wrong. Some have credibility, and some are just some nutjob's dream. Some are half truths of credibility diluted by uncredible speculation.
Many of the more shocking things uncovered were originaly just "conspiracy theories". Project MK Ultra was on par with alien abductions until references and details of it were revealed in congress.
Soldiers and some civilians reported being drugged with mind altering chemicals at various times and it was dismissed as unlikely. Yet it is not really much of a stretch to imagine tests on some soldiers in say Vietnam to test the effects mind altering substances in the field. I can only imagine the mental effects of going through some of the horrors of war by someone on something like LSD.
There is many theories you could come up for that. Perhaps the shooter was an agent of some sort and a good marksman or just a recruited extremist, and others involved had a suicide bomber go along to insure he would not survive for interogation where more facts could be uncovered.
He might have not even known he would be blown to pieces after firing those shots.
The ISI is very murky, and very effective. They are one of the best intelligence agencies in the world.
As the article by Ralph Peters demonstrates (though i don't agree with his opinions, the article is based on fact) shows she was far from a saint, and made Pakistan slide in reverse when she was in charge.
Rogue elements wanting to do "what is best for the country" may indeed have collaborated to create a complicated assassination to keep the nation on the "right path". Recruiting a radical bomber to the cause to help cover up evidence and insure nobody involved survived to be interogated seems fairly logical.
Then again it could just as easily actualy been lone "extremists" who she promised to attack when she got into power and they simply made a pre-emptive strike.
There is a great many possibilities, and every side has a reason to make people think another side is responsible for the assassination.
If she was indeed shot, and the official report said she was not, why would that be? Perhaps the bullet that struck her wouldn't match the type of pistol or caliber the documented assassin had, or perhaps they think forensics will tell the difference between the same caliber coming from a suppressed carbine from afar and a pistol from up close.
There is a great many possibilities, and only one truth. Will it be the truth that history documents? Who knows.
Many people still feel the Kennedy assassination went into the history books wrong.
It will likely remain one of those conspiracy theories for a long time to come. Conspiracy theories are just that, theories, some are right, many are wrong. Some have credibility, and some are just some nutjob's dream. Some are half truths of credibility diluted by uncredible speculation.
Many of the more shocking things uncovered were originaly just "conspiracy theories". Project MK Ultra was on par with alien abductions until references and details of it were revealed in congress.
Soldiers and some civilians reported being drugged with mind altering chemicals at various times and it was dismissed as unlikely. Yet it is not really much of a stretch to imagine tests on some soldiers in say Vietnam to test the effects mind altering substances in the field. I can only imagine the mental effects of going through some of the horrors of war by someone on something like LSD.
Fletchette
Member
You don't have to understand it. Just accept that it is there. It always has been and always will be.
Then arm yourself.
- Status
Similar threads
