Pakistan Asks U.K. To Aid Bhutto Probe

President Musharraf Blames Assassination On Terrorists; Elections Delayed Until Feb. 18

(CBS/AP)  President Pervez Musharraf announced Wednesday he had asked for British help to investigate the assassination of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto as authorities pushed back crucial elections six weeks until Feb. 18 citing the unrest caused by her killing.

Opponents condemned the postponement but said they would still contest the vote seen as a key step in Pakistan's transition to democracy after years of military rule.

"We have decided to take part in the election," said Asif Ali Zardari, Bhutto's widowed husband and now the leader of her Pakistan People's Party. "People should be peaceful and express their anger through their ballots."

In a nationally televised address, Musharraf said that the death of Bhutto, a two-time prime minister, was a great tragedy for the nation. He blamed "terrorists" for her assassination.

"We decided to request a team from Scotland Yard to come. I sent the request to (British) Prime Minister (Gordon) Brown, and he accepted the request," Musharraf said, adding that the British team would provide assistance to local investigators.

The government has resisted calls from Bhutto's party for a U.N. committee to probe the killing, and Musharraf's agreement accept help from British investigators appears a compromise step to address growing suspicions of a government cover up.

Since Bhutto's slaying last Thursday, the government has come under harsh criticism for its security arrangements for her, its claim that an Islamic militant was behind her death and its conclusion that it was the force of the blast and not gunshot wounds that killed her.

Musharraf accused "many miscreants and some political elements" of taking advantage of the tragedy to loot and plunder - a reference to the rioting that has killed nearly 60 people and caused tens of millions of dollars in damage.

But he had reconciliatory words for Bhutto's supporters, saying their slain leader had wanted to promote democracy and end terrorism.

"My mission is also the same. I want to end terrorism and let democracy flourish. It is my conviction that the development and survival of Pakistan depends on it," he said. "We need to fight terrorism with full force, and I think that if we don't succeed in the fight against terrorism, the future of Pakistan would be dark."

"This is a time for reconciliation and not for confrontation," he said.

Musharraf said he had wanted elections to go ahead as planned on Jan. 8 but destruction of election offices in the rioting in Bhutto's home province of Sindh had made that impossible. He said he supported the decision to delay the vote until Feb. 18.

The decision was condemned by Bhutto's party which says the government is not sincere in holding fair elections but would contest them anyway. The party of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif quickly followed suit.

"We will not leave the field open for the king's party under any circumstances," party spokesman Ahsan Iqbal told the AP, referring to the ruling party, which is allied to Musharraf.

The opposition alleged authorities were postponing the polls to help the ruling party, amid expectations that Bhutto's group could get a sympathy boost at the polls. The ruling party could also suffer a backlash. Bhutto had accused elements within the group of plotting to kill her, a charge it vehemently denies.

Zardari's calls for restraint by Bhutto's supporters suggested that the party would call for street protests against the delay.

Election Commission head Qazi Mohammed Farooq said the unrest had made it impossible to hold the polls on time.

"For a few days the election process came to a complete halt," he told reporters. As a result, the poll will be held on Feb. 18, not Jan. 8, he said.

Talat Masood, an independent political analyst judged the delay was "mostly about politics."

"The (election) problems are only confined to a few districts. Musharraf naturally thinks if a hostile parliament comes in he has no future."

Sharif's party reasserted its demand for Musharraf to resign.

"We will try to continue to make all parties join hands to force Musharraf from office and set up a neutral caretaker government," Iqbal said.

Spokesman Tariq Azim, from the ruling party, denied it would benefit from the postponement.

"Let's face it, a delay of a few weeks is quite understandable. We would have thought parties would go along with the decision of the election commission," he told Dawn News TV.

The White House expressed no objections Wednesday to the delay in the Pakistan elections, reports CBS News correspondent Mark Knoller.

Press Secretary Dana Perino said it was important that a specific date has been set, adding that the United States hopes the Pakistani people can have a free and fair election with the widest possible participation.

Pakistani troops, meanwhile, killed up to 25 suspected militants Tuesday in a remote region close to the Afghan border where al Qaeda and Taliban fighters operate. The fighting followed the abduction of four soldiers the same day, said army spokesman Gen. Waheed Arshad and an intelligence official. Security forces sustained no injuries in the clashes, which frequently break out in the area.

The government has blamed South Waziristan-based militant leader Baitullah Mehsud for Bhutto's murder, but he has denied involvement.

In his address, Musharraf did not explicitly blame Mehsud but he appealed to the media and Pakistanis to "expose" him and another prominent pro-Taliban militant leader Mullah Fazlullah, whom he also accused of orchestrating suicide attacks.

Also Wednesday, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner met with Musharraf but canceled a planned trip to visit to Bhutto's hometown to pay condolences, a French embassy official said on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment. He did not give a reason for the cancellation.

Nisar Khuro, a senior member of Bhutto's party, alleged the government had stopped Kouchner from traveling there, citing security concerns. "It seems that Pervez Musharraf is stopping foreign dignitaries from coming for condolences," he said. "This is sad."

Later, Kouchner laid a wreath close to the spot where she died and observed a few moments silence.

"I pay respect to the memory of a fighter for democracy and freedom," he told reporters at the scene. "Her message and her bravery will never be forgotten."

Bhutto was popular with many Western governments because she was a liberal Muslim prepared to speak out against extremism, but critics in Pakistan often pointed to how her two stints as prime minister in the 1980s and 90s were marred by allegations of corruption and inefficiency.

[b-easy63]

if you leave the west alone, if you leave us in peace, if you live by the rule of law, then we will leave you alone. But, when you hurt us or our allies, you have only yourselves to blame for the results. And I can assure you, even if the next President is a Democrat, you will see the same policy: if you attack the US, be prepared to get very, VERY hurt in return.

Posted by MichelleT35 at 02:21 PM : Jan 02, 2008


You DO realize that what you wrote is not true , right? We don''t leave any country that has something we want alone. We send in covert ops, put in propped up dictators, provide money, weapons and military hardware and let them have at it as long as we get access. It all goes to hell when the locals have had enough and rebel against our puppets in their country and our policies. The USA provided the guns and weapons and money to the Taliban. We interfere continually in the conflicts in the ME from arming and subsidizing Israel to providing helicoptors and WP chemicals for Saddam to harm the Kurds. At the time we defend what our monsters do--but if later they turn on us or we want them out of the way--we trot out the same stuff we helped them do as condemnation.

How about this--we mind our own business, find our own fuel, develop our own markets and leave them alone--and defend our own turf? We get attacked, when people decide to stop fighting our puppets and strike instead at what they perceive as the true puppet master.

[b-easy63]

NO WAY... as it appears that every time that America has been asked to help and done so, the left wing comes in and stirs up trouble..

Posted by Gaye5 at 08:21 AM : Jan 03, 2008


..and yet, it is the right wing who promotes invading/bombing countries to help them. After all their dying and bleeding and the destruction of culture and country--like Putin says--"most countries certainly don''t want the kind of help that we gave Iraq" Our version of help seems to often involve installing a puppet regime that lets us exploit the country while harming their own people--that is, unless we decide to be more pro active and go in harming them first, ourselves.

[gaye5]

Oh my gosh, yet another nation asking for Americas help. America I would be yelling at the top of my voice... NO WAY... as it appears that every time that America has been asked to help and done so, the left wing comes in and stirs up trouble..

[brianbwb-2009]

You guys might see this tomorrow morning, here in Asia, the news reports are that the US is now saying there is no need for an investigation.

Expect Britain either to follow suit and decline to have Scotland Yard get involved, or to go through fake motions, then close the case as unresolved.

[yongamerica]

What chance does Scotland Yard have in helping solve anything here now the crime scene has been washed of its carnage and evidence, the witnesses scattered, and the body buried and not available for inspection?

[brianbwb-2009]

To MichelleT35

It%u2019s wonderful how predictable, pathetic, and simple "MichelleT35s" are when it comes to debate. They ALL follow the same set of childish rules they learned in %u201Caryan nations%u201D, likely something they took from Fox News. One, when in doubt which word to use, just pull out good old %u201C9/11%u201D. Or some variant , such as %u201CAl Qaeda%u201D, AQ, Terrorists, Bush haters, Cheney haters, or whatever thought happens to be passing thru their gnat-sized brain at the moment their little verminous claws are thrashing at a keyboard. Two, throw out the %u201CR%u201D word. Yep, good old %u201Cracist%u201D. A sure debate and argument killer. Just label any person who has actually taken time to call for genocide of an ethnic or religious group %u201Cracist%u201D, and you are sure to win! (if not win, at leasy you will be correct - b.) Three, bring up Iraq, Bush, or WMD. Why? (because they are the lies that were told to cause the illegal wars, without them, there would be no "war" now, hence no need for debate. - b.)

[brianbwb-2009]

to do wHat?? More hubris.
Posted by ilikecats1

Hubris exactly. The US and Britain never wanted Bhutto to win the election that she, by all accounts was going to be a landslide, as she was promising to go after the CIA''s pet bulldogs, Al Qaeda, with measures that the US puppet Musharraf couldn''t use, as his puppetmasters need Al Qaeda in place. Without them, there is no remaining reason for US hegemony. If Bhutto even partially succeeded, she would have done what the combined hubris of the US and Britain was somehow "unable" to do.

[brianbwb-2009]

"I am frankly glad they are getting an outside source to investigation her murder. It is very badly needed. I hope they choose well." Posted by RowdyTexan2

Unfortunately they haven''t. The world knows that any investigation by the US will not get at the truth, so Pakistan goes with the British, the same people who took a ten year old conjectural thesis by an Indian college student, and passed it to Bush as evidence of Iraqi WMDs.

Apparently they hope that Scotland Yard''s reputation will cover up the taint of corruption, but it is clear that Britain is colluding with the US and Musharraf.

[rowdytexan2]

Posted by tbweb at 09:46 PM : Jan 02, 2008

Yes, strange, isn''t it. Just like the steel beams of 9/11. All evidence gone.

[tbweb]

The discussion here was about an outside source aiding the investigation into Bhutto''''s assasanation.

Posted by RowdyTexan2 at 08:06 PM : Jan 02, 2008,,,

CNN showed the crime scene where Benazir Bhutto was assassinated just 24 later and the Pakistani government had completely cleaned it up, all blood and debris was completely gone! CNN commented that usually crime scenes are sealed off so that an investigation can be done, but that in this case the crime scene was so clean you would never know Benazir Bhutto was assassinated there just 24 hours earlier. Of course Musharraf is calling for outside help to investigate because Musharraf knows full well in advance there is nothing at the crime scene to investigate, its all been cleaned up! Unbelievable.

[rowdytexan2]

"It goes without saying! Heck, you can link anything to these, including the price of rhodium, Nepalese speed limits, camel plague in Mongolia, annoying tire commercials, and even disposable diaper leakage. Yep, it sure is good to be a liberal, not having to actually think out an argument."

The discussion here was about an outside source aiding the investigation into Bhutto''s assasanation...don''t know which road you turned on.

The fact that you label everyone here a liberal shows the direction your mind works. Kinda the pot calling the kettle black, sounds like!

I am frankly glad they are getting an outside source to investigation her murder. It is very badly needed. I hope they choose well.

[michellet35]

It%u2019s wonderful how predictable, pathetic, and simple liberals are when it comes to debate. They ALL follow the same set of childish rules they learned in %u201CMichael Moore 101%u201D, likely something they took at the Learning Annex. One, when in doubt which word to use, just pull out good old %u201CNeocon%u201D. Or some variant , such as %u201Cneoconned%u201D, NC, neoconners, neo-Bush, neo-Cheney, or neo-whatever thought happens to be passing thru their gnat-sized brain at the moment their little verminous claws are thrashing at a keyboard. Two, throw out the %u201CR%u201D word. Yep, good old %u201Cracist%u201D. A sure debate and argument killer. Just label any person who has actually taken time to analyze an issue a %u201Cracist%u201D, and you are sure to win! Three, bring up Iraq, Bush, or WMD. Why? Well naturally, ALL roads lead to Iraq, Bush, or WMD! Of course! It goes without saying! Heck, you can link anything to these, including the price of rhodium, Nepalese speed limits, camel plague in Mongolia, annoying tire commercials, and even disposable diaper leakage. Yep, it sure is good to be a liberal, not having to actually think out an argument. So remember: Neocon, Racist, and Iraq-Bush-WMD. Got it? Class dismissed!

[rowdytexan2]

Posted by ilikecats1 at 06:01 PM : Jan 02, 2008

Your posts are so typical. Instead of facing the truth about the Neocons you go off in a completely different direction. Pshaw!

[rowdytexan2]

Posted by MichelleT35 at 02:36 PM : Jan 02, 2008

I am not at all ashamed of speaking the truth. We can''t even get a straight answer out of anybody in our current administration about their own actions! Are you naive enough to think that you could get a straight answer out of them regarding the corrupt administration they are supporting in Pakistan?

[greatdrivew]

I wonder how soon Musharraf will declare himself King of Pakistan? Democracy need only be destabalized a bit further before martial law would be required. A year or two later, and backed by billions of dollars in U.S. weapons, he could have his own royal family.

Gee, I wonder what that government would cost Americans in terms of tax dollars? Oh well, we''ll just allow King Musharraf to pick a U.S. state, and he can have all the income tax dollars from that state.

Sound ridiculous? Hardly, look up total income tax dollars paid by state and then compare it to numbers given in this year''s budget for foreign aid. You''ll be shocked to see who you''re really working for three months out of every year.

[tbweb]

President Pervez Musharraf knows Pakistan like the back of his hand and therefore also knows former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto needed more protection. President Musharraf is indirectly responsible for Benazir Bhutto''s death as a result. I can''t believe he let Bhutto get killed, I can''t believe she''s dead. I''ve always supported President Musharraf and did not care much for Benazir Bhutto but she still didn''t have to die like that. Musharraf knew that would happen if he didn''t protect her. :(

[hillaryin08]

"He blamed "terrorists" for her assassination."

Who let the terrorists in the city that is the very seat of the military establishment charged with the security of the Pakistani people? Where were the police or or soldiers that should have been surrounding her vehicle and keeping people from having the opportunity to get this close? They knew there were attempts being made on her life! His statements hold absolutely no water at all!

Yes, there needs to be an investigation. Why isn''''t the U.N. empowered to investigate the assanation of a country''''s prospective elected leader? By all means, bring Britain or another country outside of the middle east to investigate this. And certainly don''''t bring the US officials in the investigate it, because you can''''t believe a freaking thing coming out of this country today!




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by RowdyTexan2 at 01:57 PM : Jan 02, 2008

Yea, send Jimmy Carter or Algore in there!

[michellet35]

Rowdy Texan, just another pathetic self-hating American. How dare you insult your own country such as you just did in your last spineless post. You should be ashamed of your pathetic self, but asking a liberal to have any sense of shame is like asking a pig to perform algebra.

[michellet35]

Abdoul, you(like almost all Islamists) have intentionally reversed "cause and effect". The US needs to confront, engage and invade as an answer to Islamic violence against the US and it''s allies. The US is not "awful" because it defends itself. To the contrary, Jihad is "awful" because it insists on killing innocents, attacking civilians, and insisting on worldwide dominance and Muslim supremacy. I''ve said it before, and I''ll say it again: To the world''s Muslims, if you leave the west alone, if you leave us in peace, if you live by the rule of law, then we will leave you alone. But, when you hurt us or our allies, you have only yourselves to blame for the results. And I can assure you, even if the next President is a Democrat, you will see the same policy: if you attack the US, be prepared to get very, VERY hurt in return.

[rowdytexan2]

"He blamed "terrorists" for her assassination."

Who let the terrorists in the city that is the very seat of the military establishment charged with the security of the Pakistani people? Where were the police or or soldiers that should have been surrounding her vehicle and keeping people from having the opportunity to get this close? They knew there were attempts being made on her life! His statements hold absolutely no water at all!

Yes, there needs to be an investigation. Why isn''t the U.N. empowered to investigate the assanation of a country''s prospective elected leader? By all means, bring Britain or another country outside of the middle east to investigate this. And certainly don''t bring the US officials in the investigate it, because you can''t believe a freaking thing coming out of this country today!