Friday, December 28, 2007

Conspiracy theories already

Been flying around the web, reading all I can on Bhutto, and only one thing is really clear: we'll never know the true cause of death for sure (no autopsy), or who really was responsible. This just opens the whole thing up for conspiracy theories, from convincing to wildly speculative.

Which raises the obvious question: Why don't officials do real, competent autopsies whenever a political figure dies? Why isn't there some sort of official investigation by a respected institution like Scotland Yard or Interpol? Or even some independent investigative body? Why is there always the rush to bury, the rush to cover up details?

It's incredible to me that the UN or some or other governing body -- or just plain public outcry -- has not put into place some system of official autopsy by competent medical examiners whenever a death as important as Bhutto's has occurred, no matter what the religious beliefs of the victim, etc.--just for the sake of learning the FACTS. I mean, after the whole debacle of the JFK "autopsy," you'd think people would've learned. You'd think that even IF Musharef was involved, he'd FAKE a freakin' autopsy. If they're gonna sell us a story, make 'em freakin' WORK for it, you know?

1 comment:

Randal Graves said...

The US and pretty much every other remotely dictatorial country would never sign on to such a thing.

Of course, I don't think Oswald was the lone gunman which makes me a kook in pretty much everyone's book.

Because things like that just don't happen in the shining city on the hill, do they.

And public outcry? Can I have some of what you're smoking today? ;-)