Question about Bhutto?

And if she was never convicted why was she sentenced?

http://www.twf.org/News/Y1999/1007-Benazir.html

Both Benazir and her husband, Asif Ali Zadari, who has been in prison since she was ousted from office in 1996 for corruption, have been sentenced to five years in prison. Benazir is currently living in exile with her children in a two-room flat in London , pending the outcome of her High Court appeal next month.

Many cyncial Pakistanis discounted accusations against the Bhuttos as a frame-up. But all this changed when incorruptible Swiss federal prosecutors announced the Bhuttos and their Pakistan People's Party had hidden at least 20 million Swiss francs (C$20 million) made from money laundering, illegal payoffs, and, possibly, drug dealing in numbered accounts in Geneva. A Swiss firm hired by the Bhutto government to monitor customs duties was accused of having paid a percentage of their collections to the Bhutto's secret Swiss accounts. Swiss prosecutors froze the Bhutto accounts and sent their indictment to Pakistani federal prosecutors for criminal action.
Click to expand...
 
"However, Benazir claims the Bhuttos cannot get a fair trial in Pakistan, which is probably true. Pakistan's corrupt legal system is an extension of tribal warfare: judges and witness, like its venal politicians, are bought and sold like so many bags of basmati rice. If convicted, Bhutto will lose her right to run for office and even her extensive personal property."


From your cite!
 
Jarod said:
I never claimed she was not convicted... I said show me.

Sentenced for what?

Who knows how Pakastan's legal system works.
Click to expand...
Okay, now we have Swiss prosecutors handing the evidence over to the Pakistanis who themselves were a bit iffy about it right up to there, and you didn't even bother reading the story. It even includes the frozen Swiss accounts.

Man. Can it get any more weird in here?
 
First you said, "She was not convicted her government was." So.. I showed you she was. Later you said there was nothing about accounts, I showed you there was, including the evidence proferred by the Swiss.

How far are you willing to take this?

I still don't know if she was corrupt, but her people certainly believed she was.
 
Damocles said:
First you said, "She was not convicted her government was." So.. I showed you she was. Later you said there was nothing about accounts, I showed you there was, including the evidence proferred by the Swiss.

How far are you willing to take this?

I still don't know if she was corrupt, but her people certainly believed she was.
Click to expand...

Some people belived she was corrupt, just like some people belive President Clinton was corrupt. Its Political.

I merely asked for some support for what seemed to be wild claimes by battle that she "funnled tax payer money into Swiss accounts."


He stated this as if it were fact, not as if it were mere allegations.
 
Jarod said:
Some people belived she was corrupt, just like some people belive President Clinton was corrupt. Its Political.

I merely asked for some support for what seemed to be wild claimes by battle that she "funnled tax payer money into Swiss accounts."


He stated this as if it were fact, not as if it were mere allegations.
Click to expand...
The frozen accounts as reported by the Swiss themselves tends to lend credence to the story.
 
It is a fact.........

Jarod said:
Some people belived she was corrupt, just like some people belive President Clinton was corrupt. Its Political.

I merely asked for some support for what seemed to be wild claimes by battle that she "funnled tax payer money into Swiss accounts."


He stated this as if it were fact, not as if it were mere allegations.
Click to expand...


I use to work money laundering cases for the Department of Treasury...ie;Narcotics and terrorism...the Bhutto family is and was in the system...nice try Jr.Counselor!
 
Battleborne said:
I use to work money laundering cases for the Department of Treasury...ie;Narcotics and terrorism...the Bhutto family is and was in the system...nice try Jr.Counselor!
Click to expand...

Ohh, I see you have personal knoledge that cant be proven. I understand.

P.S. Ones family being involved in something does not make that person involved.
 
Whatever...........

Jarod said:
Ohh, I see you have personal knoledge that cant be proven. I understand.

P.S. Ones family being involved in something does not make that person involved.
Click to expand...


your argument is a oxymoron...the facts have been laid out on the table...and still you argue symantics!:rolleyes:
 
Jarod said:
That was back in August, there is a LOT of water under the bridge since then. I do not believe we were supporting Bhutto as we should have been doing. I think Bush was holding firm to his old position of supporting Musharriff as he tends to do. He looked into Musharriff's eyes and decided he was a good man.

I cant fathom why Bhutto, the archest enemy of Al Queda in Pakastan, was not our Bestest bestest friend.
Click to expand...

I think you are right.

And I don't believe it was Al Qaeda who killed her either. I never heard more BS than I've heard since that gun went off.
 
cawacko said:
Who do you think killed her?
Click to expand...

I don't know Cawacko, the General dictator who took over Pakistan in a military coup and was about to lose an election to her in two weeks?

Oh, stop, that's crazy talk!

So how was your Christmas? Did you get any thongs in your stocking?
 
Darla said:
I don't know Cawacko, the General dictator who took over Pakistan in a military coup and was about to lose an election to her in two weeks?

Oh, stop, that's crazy talk!

So how was your Christmas? Did you get any thongs in your stocking?
Click to expand...

I'm asking because I don't know or even have a clue.

No thongs unfortunately but definitely working on the that for the New Year. :)
 
Darla said:
I don't know Cawacko, the General dictator who took over Pakistan in a military coup and was about to lose an election to her in two weeks?

Oh, stop, that's crazy talk!

So how was your Christmas? Did you get any thongs in your stocking?
Click to expand...
A Parliamentary election is not the same as losing an election to her. She could have been the Prime Minister if her bloc took control of the Parliament, but she would not be President.

The reality is we pushed for them to share power because it was a very likely reality as well as her pro-western stances being intoxicating regardless of allegations of corruption from before. It was also the reason she "chided" us for supporting Musharraf.... we weren't 'supporting' her as strongly as she wanted us to.
 
Damocles said:
A Parliamentary election is not the same as losing an election to her. She could have been the Prime Minister if her bloc took control of the Parliament, but she would not be President.

The reality is we pushed for them to share power because it was a very likely reality as well as her pro-western stances being intoxicating regardless of allegations of corruption from before. It was also the reason she "chided" us for supporting Musharraf.... we weren't 'supporting' her as strongly as she wanted us to.
Click to expand...

Would Musharaff have had less power were she to win, which she was going to? Yes.

Come on, you know what military dicators do when their power is threatened in any way. Don't play naive.
 
Darla said:
Would Musharaff have had less power were she to win, which she was going to? Yes.

Come on, you know what military dicators do when their power is threatened in any way. Don't play naive.
Click to expand...
I'm not playing naive. I am stating what is real. We pressured him to share the power.

Who stood to lose the most? Him or al Qaeda with her directly running on the surprisingly popular platform of clearing out the terrorist strongholds in the north?

Politics often breed strange bedfellows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top