Friday, December 28, 2007

Is al-Qaeda the new Larry or Curly?...

Or Shemp?

Oftentimes, during Three Stooges shorts, Moe would do something and then blame it on one of the other guys… and then slap them in the head, of course. Nobody was ever the wiser.

Back on 9/11, very few people followed the money trail to see who would benefit most from the attack. The person who benefited most was Shrub, of course. He got his near-dictatorship (“near” so far). He got to surrender the treasury to his friends. He got to shit on the Constitution and make us all war criminals. But he said, “al- Qaeda did it!” and everyone believed him.

Yesterday, the world was plunged a little further into this mass-waterboarding with the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. General Musharraf has claimed that it’s the fault of his buddies al- Qaeda again, but who had the most to gain? Musharraf was going to lose the up-coming elections to Bhutto’s party, by all counts. He needed more chaos to keep his grip on power. And Bhutto’s family had already been wiped out by 60 or so years of tyranny, so what’s another?

What’s worse, however, is when Musharraf wants to have it both ways and has his people say that Bhutto did not die from a bullet wound or from a bomb. In an article that Yahoo, who is always good for a laugh when you look under the heading of “news”, they said she died from a bump on the head!

So… then al-Qaeda didn’t do it? She was just a clutz?

Just goes to show, as ’07 wraps up, that we will believe anything.

No comments: