Noise from Pakistan

I don't know much about Pakistan's Rubik's politics. It seems to be more than complex — somewhat chaotic in a sense that predictions and forecasts always seem to be wrong. I get this impression not only from the American and European press, but from those who have more awareness of the situation there. Most of them are "surprised" about the assassination of Bhutto, just months after the last assassination attempt took more than a hundred lives.

So I have the right to be surprised this morning. The news does sadden me. I don't know if she really held any promise for Pakistan's welfare; not sure if the compelling charges of corruption against her are true; I can't tell if her idea of "democratic" reform amounts to just enough "reform" to get elected, then "meet the new boss, same as the old boss"; nor do I readily accept the media's beatification of Ms. Bhutto. The trauma and moral ugliness of the murder aside, this killing can't bode well for Pakistan. Paraphrasing Shakespeare, violence is a ridiculous argument. If Bhutto was gaining ground in the coming elections, then either she's striking a popular cord or her opponents are a bunch of inept, self-serving nimrods who continue to depend on corruption to keep power and would lose an election to Satan if it was fair. I can hear the typical dribble now: America set her up in Pakistan, therefore -- ipso facto, abracadabra, open sesame, dull is my mind -- she was bad and deserved her fate.

And if it's true that so-called "Islamists" are responsible, then really they should consider converting to another religion (like Coulterism) or, better yet, rename the mendacious twisting of Islam to something else, so they can be called "Bombists" or "Get-a-kid-to-blow-himself-up-ists" or "Frustrated-hasbeen-ists". And if it's the political establishment or any of its wild tributaries that's responsible, then ... what the heck.