my sincere condolences to benazir bhutto, a woman who is very much undervalued in the context of pakistani politics. what she stood for was a fair and equal society, or what we call democracy - where people have to right to do and say what they like. Ironic then, that the assasinator had the freedom of choice to take mrs. bhuttos life. what this did, was infact portray democracy on its highest level - the freedom to kill. Mrs. Bhuttos martyrdom will only work against the opposition [ as was the case with her fathers untimely death ]. This has backfired completeley on the opposition because her popularity is now more than theres.....
2007-12-30 04:32:53 · 42 answers · asked by Anonymous in Family & Relationships ➔ Singles & Dating
Generally, one doesn't send condolences to the dead person, but rather to the family and friends of the deceased.
2007-12-30 04:36:36 · answer #1 · answered by eggman 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
There are only two things I think could be seen as funny and has nothing to do with you "being stupid"
Benazir Bhutto first of all was no saint. Although she had many redeeming political convictions her government was corrupt.
Now what they probably laughed at is that you consider democracy "the power to kill" especially when it is widely beleived to be the act of a terrorist islamic extremeist who wants a religious government who kills anyone who doesnt strictly follow a certain religious way of living. This has nothing to do with democracy. If you look at any government that is truly democratic it at least takes the publics veiw into consideration and is not plauged with killing rival political figures. So if you look at it that way that part of what you said is funny.
Terrorist straps a bomb to his chest grabs an ak finds a political figure that he beleives will destroy his society and shoots her and than blows himself up killing several other people. ~ and you call this democracy?
In a typical democratic government:
Citzen develops political beleifs. Finds a candidate who aligns most closely with their political ideals. Receives in the mail a ballot where they can give their opinion. They follow the rules and submit their ballot. The votes are counted. A political figure is elected. The people who didnt want that person in power complian for a few months, and then wait for the next election so they can vote for someone else.
2007-12-30 04:46:55 · answer #2 · answered by hollowaytyler 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no you are not stupid because benazir bhutto has the right to do what ever she wants wherea the person who killed her was on tv on an islamic news called geo news. if you have sky then go on 815 or 825 and it will have lots of picture about benazir bhutto i got shock ed after what i heard. you can never be stupid because you have not done anything stupid but the person who is stupid enough to kill benazir bhutto is the one who killed benazir bhutto.
2007-12-30 04:39:54 · answer #3 · answered by aishaqureshi 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Where to take issue with your polemic? Hmmm...for a start, Bhutto was her family name, not her husband's, so no one calls her MRS Bhutto. Secondly...she was at best, the best of a bad bunch, and the two times she was Prime Minister, she showed herself to be an ineffective leader, did very little if anything for her people, and was noted for doing nothing to stop the corruption of her government. In fact, she did a deal on corruption charges. her husband was not coming back to the country for this election, not just because of his health, but because he was known as "Mr 10%" for his graft during her times in office! She is dead, but she was no angel and she was a tremendous disappointment in office - and did nothing to change or alleviate the plight of women in her country.
Sorry, but I find what you say to be politically naive, and if people laughed at you, maybe that's what it was about. The Bhutto dynasty (for that's what it was, 'democracy' is a very flexible commodity in the choice of leaders) was as corrupt as any other in the country's history, and possibly with her death, something will actually develop in her party to something akin to 'real' democratic development, and towards the removal of the generals and the military control of Pakistan...but if I were you, I wouldn't hold my breath about it. The PPP (her party) were so much a cult of her personality there are no real contenders within it to take her place...now THAT'S democracy in action, isn't it?
2007-12-30 04:46:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
part of it was stupid
condolences don't go to the dead
and terrorism does NOT equal democracy
a person is free to kill with or without political freedom and regardless of laws
and it isn't clear if it backfired
in someways it did, in some ways it didn't, I believe
are you stupid though? I doubt it
though it also depends on where this was said. If you started saying all this in the grocery store line or walmart or something I would probably laugh to, but you didn't do that, did you?
2007-12-30 04:44:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whether we have democracy or not, people have the ability to choose to harm others. Democracy does not give us the right or the freedom to kill others. People have been killed in every form of government.
A free and democratic society does not give us the right to do anything we want. We are free to pursue the life we choose as long as it does not pose a threat to the well being of others or our society in general. We have rights but our use of those rights cannot infringe on the rights of others. We may say what we want, but it is illegal to say things that are not true about other people. We can express ourselves but the expression can be limited because of its influence on others. (the movie rating system for example.
What may have caused the laughter is your basic misunderstanding of the responsiblities that freedom place on us. It does not release us from decent and moral behaviour.
2007-12-30 04:42:28 · answer #6 · answered by dmjrev 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah not funny. You're wrong.
People do not have the right to kill. They have never had that right because murder has always been immoral.
Her death should inspire people to rise up against this violence, the selfishness of the assassination.
Democracy is NOT the freedom to kill. I don't know where you got that. Or are you just trying to sound intelligent, commenting on something a bigly indescribable as democracy.
2007-12-30 04:38:43 · answer #7 · answered by lookmira 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
you're def not stupid. In fact what you say about this case is much smarter then what everyone else says. And most people probabaly don't even know who Benazir Bhutto is, and what she stood for, therefor making you more intelligent and less ignorant. Don't ever second guess yourself.
2007-12-30 04:52:09 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, your comment isn't stupid. It is all factual. I don't know where you said it or wrote it that people laughed but you have to remember not all people are educated. You also have to take into account how old the group was and if they care about was goes on in the world. In a democratic society people have the right not to agree too.
2007-12-30 04:39:46 · answer #9 · answered by curlies55 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well yeah, you're kinda stupid, in the sense you seem to have no clue what democracy is all about, if you utter stuff like " highest level of democracy - freedom to kill".
Hope this helps
Salazar
2007-12-30 04:38:02 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Comprehensive freedom exists in anarchy and the state of nature. When we leave the state of nature (accept codified law) we accept a limitation on our freedom. Foremost on that list is the freedom to kill, which collides with another's freedom to live. Except in extreme situations, guess which way the sovereign goes...
2007-12-30 04:40:00 · answer #11 · answered by Mark P 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋