The Maverick Conservative

When President Kennedy was assassinated, was there a big push for an INTERANTIONAL investigation--despite wild rumors that Lyndon Johnson may have been involved in the assassination (one of many wild rumors that continue to this day)?  Of course not.  Would we not have regarded it as INTERFERENCE in the affairs of our country for outher countries to be demanding an international, "independent' investigation of the death of President Kennedy (letting an international investigating team do their own autopsy, for example, and letting them otherwise "investigate" in this coumtry)?  People then would have thought any such suggestion insane. 

How many people have been killed in the old Soviet Uniton, and today's Russia?  How many political opponents have been assassinated in leftist dictatorships, and in just plain dictatorships?  There must be one SOMEWHERE alomst every day.  Remember the Russian who died of radiation poisoning in BRITAIN?

Of course, we DID have an "independent" investigation of the Kennedy Assassination--although no one was INSANE enough then to suggest an interantional investigation.  Look at how LONG that took, and how LITTLE it "solved".

What was the IMMEDIATE reaction of Hillary Clinton to the news of the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan?  Her reaction was to demand an INTERNATIONAL "investigation".  Why?  You know why.  It sounds good to Democrats.  Many of them seem to dislike and/or distrust their own country so much that they want an "international" investigation of everything (including Bush and Rumsfeld). Now others have picked up the call for a U.N. "investigation"--as if the U.N. had shown itself to be a capable or unbiased institution. 

If you need prooof that Hillary Clinton should not be President of the U.S.,, this is it.  A U.N. "investigation" here would just be a POLITICAL circus that woujld merely further undermine the stability of Pakistan. 

Is EVERY assassination  (killing) for political reasons now a "crime against humanity", which is the business of the U.N./wordl community?  The very idea is ludicrous.  What makes Pakistan different?  Was Benazir Bhutto action for the U.N.?  Of course not. 

This is ally about symbol over substance.  This idea that wha "sounds good" makes sense is one of the really bad trends of our time.  It is actually a violationof the sovereignty of Pakistan to demand that Pakistan submit to an international "investigation" of a CRIME in Pakistan.  Furthre, you are an absolute idiot if you think it would "solve" anythibng.  You are an absolute idiot if you think so (Hillary Clinton pretty much qualifies, but I am not sure she is this much an indiot; she may well think that no such thing will happen--or be laid at her doorstep if it does--and that she benfits by the "sound good" effect without taking any real political risks).

Are WE not interested in Pakistan?  Of course we are  (and it is US that should be interested, and any other countries with direct influence in Pakistan--NOT the "world").  IRAN, for example, has no business meddling in Pakistan.  But IRAN is part of the U.N.  That applies to any numbre of other countries.

We give aid to Pakistan.  We certainly should be conducting our own "investigation" of what happened in Pakistan.  WE should give a STRONG statement if we determine who did this (we have our own intelligence resources;  that is what the War on Terror is all about).  If WE find out that Pakistan's government did something very wrong with OUR money (which would be true if it were involved in this assassination), WE should do something. 

Of ocurse, we should be consulting with allies in the War on Terror (for example, in Afghanistan).  We SHOUD be asking Pakistan to provide US with information.  WE shoud be co-ordination intelligence for OUR purposes.

There is no excuse for an "international", "independent" investigation.  There is a lot of excuse for us to be talking to Pakistan (as I am sure we are).

Tje idea here is ot get FACTS, and NOT to indulge in POLITICAL THEATRE.  It is obvious that Hillary Clinton (and most Deocrats, the media, and leftists in general), are interested in the theatre--not the facts. Nope.  It is NOT true that the theatre wold help our "image" in the world.  It would just make finding the real facts impossible, as the posturing took over.

NO international investigation.   WE, in consultation wit allies, should be developing our own picture of what happened here.  If Al Qaeda did this, we should STRONGLY state our resons for so believing to the world.  If Pakistan, or part of the Pakistan government, was involved, we should take at least private action, and perhaps public acton, against the guilty parties (in terms of our ONW aid an policies, in consultation with allies.

The Hillary Clinton/media/Democrat/leftist approach to this kind of problem is the exact WRONG approach.  Direct ACTION to protect our OWSN interests, including our interestin both a stable Pakistan and in not supporting peoople who are undermining that--whether members of the government or not, is what is required here.  Calling for Paksitan to allow a circus, "international" investigation is just stupid.

|  Add to del.icio.us |  digg this