Musharraf Spilling the Beans—Why Now?

Only the most deluded of my Pakistani friends would actually believe that Mushy’s u-turn after September 11 was done out of the goodness of his heart and not because he was ready to relieve himself in pants in anticipation of the impending U.S. rage.

Get real, ladies and gentlemen!

I really pity the people of Pakistan. They are ruled by a dictator whose boots are on their necks. This guy tramples on everyone, bombs and kills political rivals like Bugti, launches stupid adventures like Kargil, behaves like a lapdog to Bush and finally cashes in on all of this fiasco with a multi-million dollar book deal. In other words, he rapes the country completely and makes money off that rape. Poor ol` Jinnah!! The old man must be rolling in his grave as his dream gets transformed into a complete nightmare!!

Next time, if zeemax boasts about muslims being proud and resisiting occupation, I have only one word for him - Musharraf!!

Musharraf is an intelligent man who has consistently taken, what he has felt, to be the right decision for Pakistan. Lies can be pointed out, Volte-faces and backstabbings galore but there can be absolutely no doubt about his patriotism.

He knows that in Pakistan, a general has to hold on to Power till death. No waiting till retirement for autobiographies. And if a little theatrics can sell the book, why not....

I like Mushy because he appears to be genuine. Anybody who can speak while making a stupid face like him can`t be pretentious.
I also like him because he is less harmful than the tried and proven assholes like BB and NS. He is by far the least evil of the four military dictators we have had. Also, he has managed to steer Pakistan`s precarious existence and volatile economy quite capably.

What I don`t like about him is his obvious inferiority complex (especially when facing goras), his stupid and thoughless remarks (visas for raped women), and his use of ``I`` instead of ``we.`` However, what I detest most about Mushy is his inability to get a decent tailor for his Sehba`s clothes. She looks horrible in those shalwar suits - at least he could buy her a travel iron.

kudos to ambassador Ghori -- one of the most succinct eloquent well written political analysis that I have read on Chowk from Mr. Ghori -- I agree with the conclusion of Mr. Ghori – spilling the beans in 2006 by the cowardly lion was due to none of the above high fluting reasons.

It merely was at best a cheap shot at quick money-making -- in an undignified act of a dignified dignitary -- selling his prematurely written book at a very serious news conference. -- about a snarled story -- that is still unfolding -- that may yet have a messy ending.....

it appears in matters diplomatic -- like his school principal Mr. Bush`s (``I believe Mushrraf`` -- the boy is not lying ) -- pupil Musharraf`s senses `n sensibilities -- egged on by pure GREED -- have been numbed for verbal improprieties -- perhaps due to excessive use of alcohol.......leading to a recurring problems of Foor-in-Mouth disease....for both of them -- at public forums.

Re: # 5 serious news conference - you must be joking nasah!

Mushy seemed to be taking the piss at the conference and what better way than to turn it in a PR exercise.

#6 by taking the piss - I mean he was pulling the leg, he considered it a a joke and was having a laugh at our expence etc etc.

explanation just in case I get chopped at one knee by the chowk-staff!

A big thank you for rescinding the sentences - to chwok staff and all those who pleaded my case!

By and large, I do agree with the points made by the author, but for the fact that he has a personal axe to grind, for being a neglected diplomat after Musharaf came to power.

Would you rather believe Pak President Musharrafs claim that the US had threatened to bomb Pakistan to the stone ages, OR Bushs claim, denying any such episode?

Who should we believe?

Musharaf certainly seems more believable than Bush or Armitage.

His biography throws light on some of the very important issues facing world politics.

What if Bush simply threatens to kill Musharaf himself next? And are nt these postures dangerous, when you think these two religions hate each other anyway? Is this anyway to conduct international diplomacy or crave for dominating other nations?

http://www.hindu.com/2006/09/25/stories/2006092501611000.htm

If there were no consequences for telling the truth, no body would have ever lied. Thta is the situation that can describe Mushraf`s relationship with Pakistan. IN proverbial language this situation can be described in Musharaf`s words is ``yeh ghanta hay, iss ko ukhaar sakte ho to ukhaar lo``. This shameless a-whole has no fear of God or His people.

In relation to US, what Musharaf says is Amaerica`s message to the rest of the world, from Musharaf`s mouth, as to what would happen to a weak nation if it didn`t tow American diktat. It is just as simple as that. That is exactly the reason Chavez does what he does, in order to prevent an assassination or coup attempt by Americans or a direct assault. In other words American threat to the peace of world is very real and extremely vicious.

Dear Author,

Has any working or retired Govt functionary shared their persoal gains with their people? History would suggest otherwise, so why sud the general be judged differently?

Iraq (Tariq Aziz) example actually supports Mushy`s decision, had the meglomaniacs in Iraq listened, history of ME may have been very different. Then again, they had friends like yourself as willing admirers.

On every turn, or it seems, Musharraf keeps on claiming that Pakistan is not a bannana republic. Why? Is he sending a message that the paindoos in Islamabad have a firm grip on the political situation in Pakistan? The huffing and puffing General has no idea how the world is moving in a direction that is totally beyond his comprehension.

Maybe, Pakistan is not a bannana republic. Could it be that Pakistan is just a ``kuddoo`` republic? or a ``baigan`` republic?

All these people accusing the President of easily giving in to Americans, i am sure must never have heard a cracker exploding in their life.They should be taken to some military exercise to feel how does a hundred pounder sounds when exploding at top of your heads.I`m sure all of their bookish and wordly heroism and bravado will be shaken like their bodies.And that might also prove a turning point in their war mongering and political diplomacy skills.
Being aware of one`s size and abilities is called ``situation awareness`` and a good decision by President choosing to be an ally than victim in this war on terror.Aren`t the images from Iraq not enough to open your eyes.Who is paying the price?
As far as making money by selling book is concerned i think it is far better and nobler than selling country assets and making money out of kickbacks and commissions.

the general musharaff has played a good no-trump game given the hand of cards dealt to him. he will go down in the history as a successful politician. he clevely made political deals with the mullahs and MQM and brought stability and even got cricket back to karachi. he is not done yet, while he maybe a butt of jokes, he is prolly a very respected person in the company of world leaders.

Why now? I can think of 7 reasons..The first of which is a 1 and the other 6 are zeroes..

#10 by Urstruly on September 26, 2006 1:00pm PT


In mushy`s book, he says the CIA paid Pakistan in cash for turning over AQ detainees..how does it feel knowing that your tax $$ were used to buy the patsies sent to gitmo..and most of the people in gitmo were patsies...

I believe all Pakistani rulers should leave after three years. That is the average waiting time the public tolerates them for. After that, there is either a coup or a movement or the ruler has to make some deal with the USA to survive...........Does Australia have elections after three years?

Musharraf should have left after three years.......

Musharraf is in thick soup right now. No where to turn. I don`t think he has any plans of leaving for at least five more years. And I don`t think that he is going to give up the uniform for five more years, unless forced to do so by USA...........In addition, being President is a hell of a power trip. He gets treated like a king wherever he goes, including in the western world..........

The good thing for him is that the people are fed up with his two main opponents...NS and BB......And he has the third most powerful guy, Altaf, on his side. In addition, as long as the USA backs him, he is safe. And at the moment, he is their key guy in the Muslim world. He has delivered more for them than anyone............

For those who think that Pakistan should have stood up to USA, in bravado, I would suggest they take a look at Iraq and Afghanistan and Vietnam etc. When the USA attacks a country, it does eventually lose out to the resistance. However, in the process it decimates the whole country and puts it behind by a generation. And kills tens of thousands to millions of people........

Having said that, one cannot completely sell out one`s country to a foreign power. Especially when one knows that the foreign power is only interested in the leader and in his pro-USA policies. That is where people power and political statesmanship comes in.......

Waziristan is going to be Musharraf`s waterloo. The Pakistani public isn`t too fed up with Baluchistan but they are definitely fed up with what is going on in Waziristan. This includes officers and soldiers of the military also. The reason being that in Baluchistan it is Pakistanis fighting Pakistanis. In Waziristan the understanding seems to be that everything is being done on US direction........

On the other hand, the USA is putting pressure on Musharraf to do more........

He will be a wise man if he quitely rides off into the sunset, in the 2007 elections. But, then, who in Pakistan ever gives up power. NS and BB still want it, even after having it twice each...........So nobody goes voluntarily..............Either the economy goes below 4-5% growth or USA dumps Musharraf.........Neither seems on the horizon, hence Musharraf is not going anywhere..........

Elections after three years, with one-term term limits on Prime Minister and President. And two-term term limits on all MNAs and Senators.........should be tried out.........

Re:pseudointellect#13

[...Being aware of one`s size and abilities is called ``situation awareness`` and a good decision by President choosing to be an ally than victim in this war on terror....]

This is the exact problem. Musharraf has no strategic vision or core beliefs on which direction he wants Pakistan to go. He is a ``thaali ka baingaan`` or even better a ``dhobi ka kutta - na ghar ka na ghat ka``!! When the wind favors the Taliban, he becomes a jihadi who supports Taliban. When the wind favors the US, the man does a U-turn and becomes a moderate. What is his own inherent belief system?

If he really thinks that Pakistan ought to be moderate, then he should have done that irrespective of US pressure. If he thinks that Pakistan should be a jihadi paradise, he should work for that objective. Right now he is all over the place and is basically just trying to hold on to the staus quo (his own position) for as long as possible. That is a pathetic way to run a country.

#17 by bulleya on September 26, 2006 2:18pm PT

Still wearing that t-shirt with the Pakistani flag?

#13 by pseudointellect on September 26, 2006 1:22pm PT

Regarding mushy`s revelation that the US threatened to bomb Pakistan to the stone age and that Pakiland joined the war because doing so was in Pakiland`s interests, mushy is right...It`s definitely not in Pakiland`s interest to get bombed to the stone age..so he made the right choice..

The part about the stone age comment has been public knowledge for some time now..People thought it was Powell who made that threat..

What`s hilarious is Pakistanis deluding themselves into thinking that they somehow joined the WoT of their own volition, expecting a payola and then acting shocked when Pakistanis are among the first people being required to register with the INS and get fingerprinted..

Urstruly #10

`` If there were no consequences for telling the truth, no body would have ever lied. Thta is the situation that can describe Mushraf`s relationship with Pakistan. IN proverbial language this situation can be described in Musharaf`s words is ``yeh ghanta hay, iss ko ukhaar sakte ho to ukhaar lo``. This shameless a-whole has no fear of God or His people. ``

Talking about the truth -
Pakistan insisted it never provided material support for the Taliban or Al Qaeda

Maybe that is the reason Musharaf had to make a shameless U-turn ?

bulleya #17

`` I believe all Pakistani rulers should leave after three years. That is the average waiting time the public tolerates them for. After that, there is either a coup or a movement or the ruler has to make some deal with the USA to survive...........Does Australia have elections after three years?

Musharraf should have left after three years....... ``

You could setup a democracy with a hard 3 year term limit :-)

`` The good thing for him is that the people are fed up with his two main opponents...NS and BB......And he has the third most powerful guy, Altaf, on his side. In addition, as long as the USA backs him, he is safe. And at the moment, he is their key guy in the Muslim world. He has delivered more for them than anyone............ ``

Deliver what ? Terrorists he has been sheltering ??

You can watch musharraf on the Jon Stewart show at 11 pm tonight on Comedy Central. Mush will no doubt have lots of Ben Laden jokes to tell.

Of course, chowk discussions are vastly more entertaining than Comedy Central.

Dear Author:

You say,``..It would be interesting to see if the General shares any of his rumoured million-dollar fee...``.
That is incorrect . The advance fee was $100,000 and the total fee would be 5 times that according to CBS reporter.
You must believe these rumours with a pinch of salt! Wa Salaam.


Kamath

Musharraf might rake it in big..........

His book is fifth on Amazon, right now...... http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/ref=pd_ts_h/002-7737860-7247208

Ahead of John Grisham, Bill O`Rielly, U2, Richard Clarke....

He is 13 places ahead of Thomas Friedman..........

I avoid commenting on Mr. Ghori’s article for one simple reason that despite his claims of being a former diplomat, he is unable to maintain a professional writing style. It is okay for interactors here to call Bush dubya or by any other name but a former diplomat should maintain some semblance of professionalism in his writings to be taken seriously by the readers.

“The fact that Musharaf has taken 5 long years to level with the people of Pakistan on the exact backdrop to his crass ‘capitulation’ to American arm-twisting isn’t guaranteed to atone his ‘sins’ in the eyes of the Pakistanis.”

The whole premise is absolutely ridiculous here. Musharaf was not trying to level with the people of Pakistan. He was just trying to sell his book. He wrote that particular incident on his publisher’s recommendation and repeated it on his publisher’s recommendation. One has to be a complete idiot to not figure this out from the way the whole thing was presented to the US audience on a primetime show. The publisher had fairly good idea what would sell the book and how to market the book, Musharaf just followed marketing manager’s advice. So Musharaf never entertained any thought of leveling with people because he does not need to on this issue.

What is the big deal about Musharaf coming out with a story which had NO significance whatsoever in the whole scheme of things? If any one believes that Pakistan would not have sided with the US after the 9/11, threat or no threat by Armitage, he probably lives in a fool’s paradise and should be hanged and mercilessly punished for being a dunce of the highest order.

Pakistan and the Pak army have a long history of working with the US and especially with the US DOD. Show me one incident in the last 60 years when Pakistan was on the wrong side of the US. Now let me put my neck out and say this here: show me incidents real or fake when the US DID NOT side with Pak or the Pak army in the last 60 years. Even in AQK`s case the US actually helped Pakistan.

Musharaf is NO trailblazer, he did what any army chief, any civilian PM or any other mai ka lal would have done in Pakistan.

Pakistan support for the Mujahideen was well known and Pak had US blessings. The US looked the other way when Pakistan was promoting Taliban as the US saw no reason to deny its best ally a reward for help in defeating the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

However, Pakistan’s commitment to the US is much bigger than its commitment to anything else. Taliban or no Taliban, Pakistan was never going to be on the wrong side of the US. In fact, people who pay attention to these matters have known all along that after 9/11 the whole drama was created to get some PR and media value out of it. Powell, Tennet, Armitage, Rummsfeld and Cheney knew that already. Only person who probably had no clue was perhaps President Bush himself as he had no active understanding of Pakistan’s and especially Pakistan army’s longstanding relationship with the US.

Re: HP #26

Well said, HP!

It is an annoying habit of retired diplomats and generals and bureaucrats in Pakistan to re-discover the noton of ``public service`` once they leave office. While in office, these honorable men are the guardians of power and status quo and once out of it; they start to sermonize about democracy and the public`s right to know everything under the sun, which they themselves had denied the public in the first place, while they were in office.

If one were only to judge the reaction to Musharraf`s comments by comparing the best seller lists of New York Times and Amazon.com, before and after the ``infamous`` CBS interview, one would immediately realize the genius of the PR/marketing ploy of the comment.

Ciao

Re: # 26

There have been exceptions.
the Kargil war was one where Pakistan did not get any support from US. In fact, the US posture had a lot to do with ending the conflict.

Musharraf may be an opportunist out to sell his book, he may have lied outrightly on many occasions, conducted about turns and volte faces on many issues under US Pressure, but he cannnot ever be accused of having pout his own interests over his country`s interests. Is he still not much better than all the previous rulers??

A man who has consistently acted in the best national interests must be applauded as a true patriot. Findiing fault and pointing out trivialities is not going to get us anywhere...

HP writes <<< In fact, people who pay attention to these matters have known all along that after 9/11 the whole drama was created to get some PR and media value out of it. >>>

What they fail to note however is that such ``revelations`` might have unintended consequences in Pakistan, which I hope will be for the better. Not everyone in the Pak military is as `bey ghairat` as musharraf and previously they have felt the need to fakely present themselves as vanguards of the nation, as far as I can remember they have never before come out so openly as capitulating cowards, even though as you note their actions were more or less the same. Such incidents multiplied might lead eventually to the political authority of this `occupation force of the Americans in Pakistan`i.e. the Pak Army to erode, which would be a step in the right direction.

okhla99 writes <<< There have been exceptions.
the Kargil war was one where Pakistan did not get any support from US. In fact, the US posture had a lot to do with ending the conflict. >>>

Nothing in this goes against what HP wrote. The US is not interested in Pakistan`s tiny regional adventures except when it involves its own desires (all peons are given some autonomy when they dont interfere with the master`s estate), it is quite indifferent to them. Pakistan capitulated to the US demands, because India happens to be more important to the US than Pakistan, which they use often enough as a convenient whore, so what was so different in this?

Looking out for ``best national interest`` does not mean you make decisions that surrender national sovereignity (granted there wasnt any before, thanks to the Pakistan military). If you do that then there is no ``national interest`` since there is no ``nation``. Very simple concept, and the person who does that is not a ``national leader`` but a ``foreign occupying force``.

Feroz writes <<< If one were only to judge the reaction to Musharraf`s comments by comparing the best seller lists of New York Times and Amazon.com, before and after the ``infamous`` CBS interview, one would immediately realize the genius of the PR/marketing ploy of the comment. >>>

It might be a marketing ploy for those wanting to make money off the book no doubt but hidden behind it is an explicit rendition of the slave-master relationship between the US and Pakistan, which to people in Pakistan should mean more than the money Musharraf makes off his book.

Dear masadi:

Why are you, once again, hyperventilating? Three posts one after the other, eh! You would not lose any chance to deflect the Musharraf bashing on this site to the US bashing, uh!
Could you ever maintain the parameters and boundaries of your arguments?

Respectfully submitted,

Re: # 26 by HP on September 26, 2006 7:17pm PT

Dear HP:

Why should {a former diplomat should maintain some semblance of professionalism in his writings to be taken seriously by the readers.}? Could you please elaborate?

By their very definition, a diplomat develops forked tongue and are all over the map and nowhere at the same time. Unlike US diplomats, Pakistani diplomats have learned schmoozing 101 from their families, who have mastered the skills of nepotism and cronyism. How dare should we expect better characters to be diplomats of Pakistan? Their only value is to the editors of Dawn, because poor folks at Dawn can not get half-assed worthy column writers, and only these retired (or some would call them retarded) diplomats to write for them.

I am sure that you know about these wretched souls. Don`t you?

Respectfully submitted,

Re: # 30

Looking out for ``national interests`` does include preventing the nation from being ``bombed back into the stone age``.

Looking out for ``national interest`` does include ensuring that the nation does not go the Iraq or Afghan way which it surely would have done post 9/11 had Musharraf not adopted the course he did.

You can continue to crib ad nauseam about surrendering ``national sovereignty`` and other such notions which have long been mortgaged with feudal lords, military or whosoever holds sway in whatever bit of territory. Fact of the matter is that Musharraf has kept the US fire away from Pakistan inspite of OBL/ Taliban/ terrorist camps/ Jehadis and so on inspite of clear proof from satellites, the world media and various other bodies.

Let us take time out from incumbent bashing....

Re: # 4

Salim, for the 1st time i have to totally agree with you...:)

yes yes..well said HP..

The Paki government actually did AQK a big favor by putting him under house arrest and not letting even his family meet him..everyone knows his daughter is a big bore anyway so not being allowed to meet her is actually a benefit for AQK..and the dropping of the hellfires and repeated incursions in Pakiland were also meant to clear some illegal construction...

Just as abandoning the bodies of paki army soldiers on the moutains of Kargil was actually a big victory for Pakiland....

The geniuses who told pakis that abandoning the bodies of their soldiers on Kargil without an inch of land was a victory actually war gamed confrontation with the US...

you can`t make this stuff up.



Musharraf `war-gamed` U.S., concluded Pakistan would lose

PAUL KORING

WASHINGTON -- Pakistan`s military ruler, Pervez Musharraf, says he contemplated war with the United States in 2001 but opted instead to forsake the Taliban and become President George W. Bush`s ally.

``I war-gamed the United States as an adversary,`` the Pakistani leader wrote in his martially titled memoirs In the Line of Fire, published yesterday. It apparently didn`t take the general, then an international pariah for having staged a coup to toppled his country`s democratic government, very long to conclude that Pakistan would lose.

``The answer was a resounding no,`` he wrote, having concluded that the world`s most powerful military would wipe out his forces, destroy his nuclear weapons, wreak havoc on Pakistan`s threadbare infrastructure, help India seize disputed Kashmir and then turn to his archrival in New Delhi for the support and bases it needed to topple Afghanistan`s Taliban regime.

#29 by masadi
“What they fail to note however is that such ``revelations`` might have unintended consequences in Pakistan, which I hope will be for the better.”

In some normal and regular political environments, there would have been some consequences and from a purely academic pov, I would agree with you.

The situation in Pakistan is taking a turn where Musharaf is the only acceptable person from Pakistan for the west as well as for the moderates in Pakistan. So his revelation is due to his knowledge that “consequences” are manageable. The US not only has made him a hope for the moderates but it has created environments that will prevent any chance of a military coup from the rightwing generals possible. The better alternate in Pakistan would be a control of the moderates but the political parties that represent the moderates don’t have the capacity or the political will to confront the army w/o the US blessings.


The situation in Afghanistan and Iran will get ugly and the Pak army and Musharaf will have to take some blame for that. The blame may come from the US or from both Afghanistan and Iran depending on the side that gains the upper hand. In both situations, the Army would weaken and that gives a small hope to the moderates in Pakistan that the army would be forced to handover power back to the moderates like it did in 1989.

Btw, Have you noticed how N0-man Khasi singh has caved in after his Cuba visit? Read his statements of late and that would give some clues abt Musharaf`s confidence.

Khasi_m, You know this ID will not last long either...

Re: # 17

I agree 200% with you. General started on slippery slope with fake october election and there is no end to slide. He should have allowed all three big leaders to return and forgive them as was done for atom bomb maker and allowed elections and faded away. He himself has boxed in and there no graceful exist. Once again army rule with any objective or direction. His electon farce deminished him for ever.

Apparently, Musharraf still lives with fallacies & fantasies. It would have been a great book if Musharraf had admitted that:

A - It was a great blunder to continue with Islamic fervour even after the Soviet left Afghanistan. Why blame the West. The West never asked Pakistan to create Taliban.

B - The unpredictable Afghan tribes being a `strategic depth` was an equally stupid idea.

C- Kargil was stupid adventure - a disastor for the Kashmiri cause and Pakistan`s image. Telling open lies & losing yet another war was equally disgraceful.

D - Agra summit failed because he wanted Kasmir solution before other matters. After wasting three years, he agreed to the same composite dialouge.

E - Lumping all blame on Bhutto and not army for 71 is not fair.

On the plus side:

Finally, he has picked up the courage to quote that Jinnah`s speech: `You can go to the temples, mosques......Religion has nothing to do with business of State`.

His Waziristan deal is sensible. The traditional tribal elders who were sidelined during the Soviet War and Mulla was pampered to produce Mujahiddin is being reversed. Mulla is to be put back into the Mosque in line with the traditional Pashtun tribal customs. And it is the Malik in Hujra who is the temporal ruler.

He is naive but sincere. Actually secular but lacks courage to deal with Mullas.

His On-JOB-Training may cost us dearly in Baluchistan.

nhk

Apparently, Musharraf still lives with fallacies & fantasies. It would have been a great book if Musharraf had admitted that:

A - It was a great blunder to continue with Islamic fervour even after the Soviet left Afghanistan. Why blame the West. The West never asked Pakistan to create Taliban.

B - The unpredictable Afghan tribes being a `strategic depth` was an equally stupid idea.

C- Kargil was stupid adventure - a disastor for the Kashmiri cause and Pakistan`s image. Telling open lies & losing yet another war was equally disgraceful.

D - Agra summit failed because he wanted Kasmir solution before other matters. After wasting three years, he agreed to the same composite dialouge.

E - Lumping all blame on Bhutto and not army for 71 is not fair.

On the plus side:

Finally, he has picked up the courage to quote that Jinnah`s speech: `You can go to the temples, mosques......Religion has nothing to do with business of State`.

His Waziristan deal is sensible. The traditional tribal elders who were sidelined during the Soviet War and Mulla was pampered to produce Mujahiddin is being reversed. Mulla is to be put back into the Mosque in line with the traditional Pashtun tribal customs. And it is the Malik in Hujra who is the temporal ruler.

He is naive but sincere. Actually secular but lacks courage to deal with Mullas.

His On-JOB-Training may cost us dearly in Baluchistan.

nhk

HP is right in #26 that Pak would have hitched onto the bandwagon anyway, threat or no threat. It had no reason to go to war on Taliban`s behalf, but rather still supporting them only to keep the Northern Alliance at bay. This is where US double-crossed Pak.

Taliban had started to become a headache for Pak as well since the world community considered Pak responsible for Taliban`s actions and pressured it to control them. But as it was, Taliban after coming to Power had begun to spurn Pakistan`s `suggestions` re matters such as the Bamyan Buddhas, softening their strict sharia laws, handing over Usama after African embassies etc., and had been gradually distancing themselves from Pak influence.

Part of the deal with US was that after fall of Taliban, Kabul will be held by international forces. As it turned out, US got the Northern Alliance waiting on the edges of Kabul till Taliban evacuated, and then allowed them to occupy the capital. That was a betrayal.

I`m sure that if President Musharraf leaves tomorrow these same stupid people will be painting mournful and sorry ass lines like ``Teri yaad aayi tairay jaanay k baad`` at the back of trucks.Politics in pakistan has turned into a sort of entertainment and monkey business.You expect political maturity from people ready to sell their vote over a plate of rice or distributing sweets after nuclear explosions.What`s this three year suggestion? Politics is not cricket or musical chairs that test match should be turned to one day and everyone will get the chance.If whole of your Afghan and foreign policy can take somersault after 9/11 then why blaming just the President why nobody talks of the strategists or Political pundits or the predecessors of the present political regime.It is the blunders and spineless stature of previous leaderships that are haunting us now.Raising fingures is easy facing the facts demands courage.Here is a joke for the geo-political hogwashers of chowk,

A heckler once interrupted Nikita Khrushchev in the middle of a speech in which he was denouncing the crimes of Stalin.``You were a colleague of Stalin`s,`` the heckler yelled, ``why didn`t you stop him then?``. Khrushschev apparently could not see the heckler and bursted ,``who said that?`` No hand went up.No one moved a muscle.After a few seconds of tense silence , Khrushchev finally said in a queit voice, `` Now you know why i didn`t stop him.``

Good generals(soldiers) never retire, they just fade away, Who you are talking to dude?

with the Amiritage episode and its instant after effects on his dignity and self respect -- General Musharraf glorifies the art & the science of abject surrender of a country like Pakistan -- in front of alowly State Dept employee -- to new heights of self demeaning himself and his country -- what a blighted story and and what a relishing way to tell about self-degradation to the entire world! -- it is something that his enemies should have done to him -- not the Generalissimo himself.......Musharraf is unreal....he is his own worst enemy...

Re: # 26 On the money there.

I get the feeling that people here, including the likes of URstruly and Masadi, agree with the general content of the decision. What they seem to disagree with is the manner in which the case has been presented. Hence Urstrly`s admonishments in his posts.

But you have to hand it to the General, that he is capable of calling a spade a spade. A rose with any other name, still smells the same.

Also in the grand scheme of things, the good general as president of pakistan has the same level of prirority as Armitage in the US, and as general is almost subordinate to Zinni. That is the way the empires are structured. He is no Blair leading one of the largest economies of the world to be getting a higher priority!

While I think Musharraf should have fixed 2 or 3 basic problems in Pakistan after he took over (basically by restoring the checks and balances between the executive, legislature and the supreme court that nawaz sharif had foolishly tried to destroy by declaring himself a mard-e-momin; and by undoing the compromise of the justice system in pakistan done by zia by introducing a parallel set of sharia courts and his self-serving ordinances).

If Musharraf had done that, he would have been a hero in the eyes of most Pakistanis and in the eyes of history. Instead, he has not done the above and he has also vastly prolonged his stay as unelected president.

#41 Nazar Sahib

Let me add the following to your list of A) through E).

F) – Calling the Kashmiri killers “freedom fighters” – in middle of supposed peace talk, the height of stupidity!

G) – Pulling off the IC-814 and lying outright when caught – the height of double idiocy.

H) – Sheltering international mobsters and smugglers who create havoc across the border, and denying their existence which is known to the whole world – the height of underestimating everyone else’s intelligence.

I) – Turning on the terrorist tap again and again, with the futile hope that it will somehow, in a weird manner – bring about a speeding up of “peace” process – the height of being an utter moron!

J) – Putting feet in mouth again and again – the most notable being in the aftermath of the Mai episode – the height of absurdity.

And Nazar sahib, it was not any prior lack of courage that stopped Mushy from quoting the vamp Jinnah before – nor any fact that Jinnah was “out of style” then. Mushy is the CEC, the President, the khaki-in-chief, plus any of the thousands of other titles he could pick for himself – he is the current all-in-all of the land of the Pure!

Mushy did not quote Jinnah before because he does not sincerely believe in Jinnah’s bombastic speeches.

Nor do ANY of the Pakistani leaders – political or khaki.

Nor do the Pakistanis at large.

Nor did the charlatan Jinnah himself!

Yeh sabhie jaante hain ki ration per bhashan kaise diya jaata hai. Lekin Pakistan mein ration dene wala koi hai nahin!

And until the Pakistanis work on that mindset of Islamic “exclusivity” – there won’t be any, either! Take this plain fact from this very ordinary Indian!

Sad – but true!

The khakis are there for the long haul – because in Pakistan – “everything else tastes worse!”

#45 I agree with you that the general talks straight. Yesterday, on the Jon Stewart show, when asked by Stewart that if elections for Karachi mayor or something were held today and the two candidates were George Bush and Osama Ben Laden who would win - Musharaff came back with the right answer (``both would lose``). When asked by Stewart ``Where is Osama``, he responded ``I dont know. Perhaps you know, and we will follow you and find him.``

Stewart did a great job of being appropriately respectful to a head of state while being humorous at the same time, and Musharraf did a great job of responding in good humor and with straight answers.

This does not change what I wrote in #46 though.

HP looks like the general and manmohan singh did make some deal..usually the UN general assembly speech is all about support (moral and political) for Kashmiri struggle. Not much of that this time around, it was mostly about talibans being pashtuns.

Musharaff has done the most for de-islamization of pakistan..he takes responsibility for his actions without divine perspiration, this alone will go a long way. Overall he seems to have screwed khassi sindhis big..water issues, and handing over the sindh jagir to MQM. I guess he figured sindhis are ..

okhla99 writes <<< Looking out for ``national interest`` does include ensuring that the nation does not go the Iraq or Afghan way which it surely would have done post 9/11 had Musharraf not adopted the course he did. >>>

Then you agree there is no nation when the ``nation`` surrenders itself to the wishes and wills of another (as a slave). Independance surrendered in this fashion can be described by many titles but certainly not by saying it was ``national interest``, it goes against every single definition of ``nation state``. So far in the US ``farce on terror``, it`s only success has been the capitulation of Pakistan without a fight, others have more ghairat. What Musharraf did (by his explicit admission) is a case of ``high treason`` given the definition of nation state and not ``national interest``- understand what a ``nation`` means.

In addition to #49 Turkey did not capitulate, it refused to allow US invasion of Iraq through its territory. What did the US do, it circumvented the political in Turkey and was talking directly to its military, even that did not work, and I don`t see them bombed into ``the stone age``. That is an example of ``national interest`` when a nation does something as an independant entity and is not bullied by those who treat it as slaves and dependants.

#45 by - --...- --

But you have to hand it to the General, that he is capable of calling a spade a spade. A rose with any other name, still smells the same.

Yaar you are overestimating the General`s straight-talking ways. He is able to do that only because he has the uniform on. In the past, he has made it clear that he is able to tackle contentious issues only because he feels stronger as a general than a mere politician. Let`s see if he can take off the uniform and be the same straight-talking fellow he pretends to be now.

yes..well said HP..

the PAF, MIA in Kargil, would have bombed the tribals in the NWFP anyway..

the paki army would have been fighting the tribals anyway....

pakis being singled out for deportation is actually a good thing for pakis..

pakis facing extra scrutiny and PIA not being allowed direct flights to the US is actually a very good thing for Pakiland and pakis..

advantage pakis....

there`s self-deluded, and there`s paki-deluded..

#51 by masadi

True. That is why I had asked the question on the other board that ``Could US actually have carried out its threat, and at what cost?``. But noone answered. I think the Turkish example proves that US would have backed off. Turkey is nowhere near Pak but it resisted firmly and US could do nothing. However, the fact remains Pak had no reason to go to war on behalf of Taliban who had turned against Pak(#42).

THE SITUATION ROOM

BLITZER: Let me read to you also from the book ``In the Line of Fire.``

You write this: ``Those who habitually accuse us of not doing enough in the war on terror should simply ask the CIA how much prize money it has paid to the government of Pakistan.``

We asked the CIA how much prize money they have paid to the government of Pakistan. They have no comment.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: We asked former intelligence officials, who say that no such money was paid. They give rewards to individuals, but no prize money to Pakistan.

(CROSSTALK)

MUSHARRAF: I don`t know whether this is to the government of Pakistan. I don`t think I wrote the government of Pakistan.

BLITZER: The book says, on page 237, ``the government,`` ``paid to the government of Pakistan.``

You want to revise that?

MUSHARRAF: Yes. I think that, if it is written ``government of Pakistan,`` yes.

It has to -- these people, there are so many of them that had money of $5 million there, declared, had money. So, that has to be given.

Now, to whom it is given and how it is given, I don`t even know the details. But, however, there is only -- there is not one person who is involved in these operations. There is a whole organization and a whole operation that goes on of intelligence and law enforcement agencies.

How the money gets distributed, it is distributed to people, certainly. So, I`m very clear that this money does get distributed. I`m not even involved in who distributes and who exactly gets.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: The U.S. Justice Department does confirm they have given money to Pakistani citizens for help.

MUSHARRAF: Yes.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: ... resulting in the arrests of certain high-level officials.

(CROSSTALK)

MUSHARRAF: Certainly not the government, and not the government. And I would like -- if I have written the government of Pakistan, no, government of Pakistan has not received anything.

BLITZER: All right.

#55 by arjun_macaca

And your point?

#56 by Zeemacaca

And your point?

The point is that the US attorney general`s observations about Pakis during Aimal Kansi`s trial are not too off the mark.

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060313080211207

Excerpt:

The information given to PAC by FO reveals the effectiveness of lobbyists from Pakistan and India and how both spend millions of dollars to protect their interests,” an insider told TFT. “If this information is correct, then it is not only damaging for Pakistan but also for the US where some people publicly degraded Pakistan by saying that ‘Pakistanis will sell their mothers for a dollar’.”

Arjun-m

A very warm welcome back. And my tax dollars, well they are also used to welcome you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G7gq7GQ71c

but the US did use Incirlik Air Base in both wars in Iraq. Unless I am mistaken, Incirlik Air Base is in Turkey.


#52 HH agreed. That is the discipline ofthe army. Hence heis able to do things which others would think unthinkable. You have accept the fact that FOR Pakistan he has done the right thing upto a point nothwithstandingthe stuff Arjun_m so forcefully highlights.

Unfortunately in the international arena he will have to be measured by these metrics (ARjun_M`s list). Internally he has done good!

Re:HP#26

[...Pakistan and the Pak army have a long history of working with the US and especially with the US DOD. Show me one incident in the last 60 years when Pakistan was on the wrong side of the US.....]

Bravo!! What a honorable history!! Dont you feel any shame in writing something like this? Pakistan is a sovereign country that does not deserve to be sovereign. In the past, India had close ties to the Russians but it was never in bed to such an extent.

Actually I am not that surprised. History has shown that any invader to the Indian subcontinent met any real opposition at Panipat, which is in India. Their journey through Pakistan would be a cakewalk as Pakistanis would simply line up with garlands to welcome them. Once they crossed over to India they would face a real fight from Rajputs, Sikhs and Marathas. Most of the opposition to British rule also happened in India, while Pakistan produced feudal lords who were British chamchas.

Looks like this habit of rolling over and surrendering is so ingrained in Pakistani genes that even with 1000 years of Islam it hasnt changed one bit. One can only imagine what ultimate cowards Paksitanis were when they were hindus in the past. It is good that you guys converted to Islam, at least you are not shaming hindus any more but shaming all muslims.

but the US did use Incirlik Air Base in both wars in Iraq. Unless I am mistaken, Incirlik Air Base is in Turkey. And Turkey is part of NATO hence you cannot use the same yard stick to compare it with Pakistan.

#52 HH agreed. That is the discipline ofthe army. Hence heis able to do things which others would think unthinkable. You have accept the fact that FOR Pakistan he has done the right thing upto a point nothwithstandingthe stuff Arjun_m so forcefully highlights.

Unfortunately in the international arena he will have to be measured by these metrics (ARjun_M`s list). Internally he has done good!

#57 by ugly_hyd_macaca

Sure but CIA said the same thing about you as well ..but added the phrase MEAN BASTARDS ... i.e. ...

“When I queried how and why the Indians sold weapons that they knew would be used against their friends the Soviets, the CIA officer replied `The Indians are mean bastards, not trustworthy at all. For money they would even sell their mothers`.”

Only thing is they were right in your case but wrong in Pak`s case because Pak has not turned in UBL or Zawahir in for $25 mio each.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#60 What did you smoke for breakfast?

for Tahmed32

Left a message for you on UP on my thread!

#61 What arjun highlights as a presumed weakness, is to my mind a strength on musharraf`s part - he came across as honest when he noted what seemed like an error in his book. Only a total nincompoop would think that the general would sit down a write the book himself, and musharraf is smart enough to realize he does not need to pretend otherwise.

#65 thanks. will check it.

#58 by Urstruly on September 27, 2006 5:53am PT

you have it backwards...It`s actually your very generous tax $$ that are paying for my lifestyle..and it`s only going to get better..i heard on the news this morning that the DoD budget is going to be a record ~450billion $..

arjun: Your ``life style`` eh? :-) You mean like sitting before the keyboard all day long, clicking from one website to another? I know trees in Pakistan that have a better lifestyle.

Actually all of you are on the wrong track.

The real story is that of Mushy and MMSingh (please note: Mushy provided MMSingh with tips on how not to be follically challenged!) and the hand shake in Havana. Ofcourse over Cuban Cigars hand rolled by special women.

The real conspiracy theory is this: India and Pakistan elite have created this together so the population could have something to discuss rather than roti, kapda aur makaan. Mushy slipped up, since he was not part of the gang and hence kargil. he took the propaganda way too seriously and did something he shouldnot have. India made him sweat for a few years. And viola you have Havana, cigars and all. Today in the UN Pakistan has dropped Kashmir like a hot potato. Its talking about how Pashtoons are a mistaken lot and they need to be better integrated into Afghan society.

(if you carry this forward you guys can develop an even more interesting conspiracy theory. This will provide an even more stronger basis for zeemini`s views on Indians as quoted in #62 and we can see him squealing with joy and whooping with pleasure at this chance - go for it)

#66 yes, the general is very cool. najm sethi had some observations. he said, the general can say contradictiry things because it does not matter, he is not accountable to what he says. he just shrugs it off and gets on with it. its not like pakistani people are against him or on the streets, and he gets a nice and warm welcome from NRPs whereever he goes..no shunning happening anywhere. overall, he is on a very strong wicket. only real pressure on him comes from washington, for pakistani people he is a real badshah.

#71 as chowk is my witness, pakistani people are too down-to-earth to treat anyone as a badshah. or a goodshah. :-)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Zeemax #54 <<< However, the fact remains Pak had no reason to go to war on behalf of Taliban who had turned against Pak >>>


The ``taliban`` (an external) is not the issue in such capitulation, it is that the ``nation`` surrenders itself to the wishes and wills of another (as a slave) upon threat, for whatever the other`s desires might be. (even though it was just showmanship), translating that as ``national interest`` is simply prepostrous and the ``leader`` whose decision is unconditional surrender no questions asked is no leader whatsoever, otherwise the whole concept of national sovereignty is moot~ which in fact it is given how the US lords it around all over the globe yet maintains this non-existanant fictitious system for easy plunder.

#75 by masadi

Yes no argument about this. Pak should have told US to eff off and we`ll see what`s in our best interests. He didn`t do that. That`s why he`s just a smalltime punk. No doubt.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

so the tag team has arrived!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#80 Please read #77 once more. Perhaps enrolling for reading comprehension class would be good for you.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Gen Mahmud told Mushy ``Woh hamari Eent se Eent baje denge``..What`s the origin of the phrase and what does it mean specifically..i know the overall idea is that they`ll do something very unpleasant, but what`s the reference to the brick?

#73 Arjun - you are slower than usual today. Re-read what I wrote carefully. If you still dont get it, ask some 6 year old to explain it to you.

#83 could it be they will use our bricks to destroy us. In other words suggesting that Pakistan has enuf people inside who would do the dirty on it. Perhaps this could be the third reason of Mushy for siding with US - that pakistan cannot muster enough people to confront the US.

#84 bad_shah, good_shah :?

zeemax # 76
[Yes no argument about this. Pak should have told US to eff off and we`ll see what`s in our best interests. He didn`t do that. That`s why he`s just a smalltime punk. No doubt.]

it`s easy to be an arnold shwartznegger interacting at chowk...at the first sign of american bombs all you mullahs would be hiding under your beds...even though i hate the bastard, he did the only sensible thing he could to save not only his ass but our collective asses too...

zeemax...you are the champion macaca warrior...just do that...and don`t think you have graduated to fight like a man...keep on trying...maybe in a thousand years...

Masadi #50 & #75
Respected Masadi Sahib,

You seem to be living in a crazy world of your own. Everyone but you seems to know that Pakistan today does not enjoy the stature of Turkey or most other Muslim nations. It cannot say ``NO`` to US. Whether this is due to lack of moral strength, ideological strength, or simply the fear of coming face to face with the misdeeds of its own army and agencies in the past in letting the ISI support Taliban, Lashkar, Jaish etc. Once complicity with terrorists has been exposed, established, there would be a price to pay. In the comity of nations it is placed around Afghanistan and Iraq. Most of the world (and most Pakistanis) believes Pakistan is a failing state, on the brink of collapse, not able to control the Islamic hardliners. Whatever gave you the idea that Pakistan could do a ``Turkey`` to the US. Open your eyes. Please, open your eyes.

Musharraf has prevented the ship from sinking, nay, being torpedoed. He is a leader who can still exercise some control on the army. A whole lot of Pakistanis respect him. The Indians are scared of him. Musharraf can get away with direct attacks like KArgil (thinly veiled behind the mujahideen) on India. Musharraf can emphatically deny any army involvement in KArgil for years together and then suddenly own up to it as ``Pakistan Army`s finest moment``. Musharraf can do anything, say anything he wants. He will remain in power as long as he lives.

He is the best bet Pakistan has at the moment. The TINA factor as the Indian newspapers would say (There Is No Alternative). Folks like you can ridicule him and talk of theoretical nation states. But as far as theories in Pakistan are concerned ``It is merely paper....``.

And . if Pakistan is now doing something to actually combat terrorism, why crib....

So come on now, wake up to reality.Please.


Regards.

zeemax, masadi and other perpetual whiners .........

........ for god`s sake stop whining about what poor richard armitage said to general mahmud - the guy is a pussy cat compared to this :

``I call you to God and to Islam. If you respond to the call, you are Muslims: You obtain the benefits they enjoy and take up the responsibilities they bear. If you refuse, then [you must pay] the jizyah. If you refuse the jizyah, I will bring against you an army of tribes who are more eager for death than you are for life. We will fight you until God decides between us and you.``

........ even though i think the goon in khaki has done incalculabel damage to all the institutions in pakistan, he did the right thing by turning against the barbaric taliban - this horrible scourge must to be eliminated ........... i know you guys hate women and like living in caves, but most of us don`t ..........

{``It would be interesting to see if the General shares any of his rumoured million-dollar fee from the publishers of the book, Simon & Schuster, with the people of Pakistan``}

Ghori Sahib,
Thank you for an informative and timely article. One fact that few people seem to recognize is that Mushy is proving his honesty by trying to make some personal gain through this stupid act of writing his memoirs while still in office. If Mushy had been really corrupt and had benefited from the ambidextrous looting of the nation, he would have neither the time nor the need to write this autobiography and have it published in the west. What I do find amusing and deplorable at the same time is his use of his state visit to drum up demand for his book.

re. Okhla99, #88

Very well said, though it pains me to think that you will soon come to the realization that you are hitting your head against a wall-- or may as well be.

It takes a special naiviete, or disingenuousness, or both, to compare US relations with Turkey in 2003 with that of Pakistan immediately following 9/11. But some do possess these virtues in abundance, as is about to be made clear to you.

re. ``Folks like you can ridicule him and talk of theoretical nation states. But as far as theories in Pakistan are concerned ``It is merely paper....``. ``

Folks like this can do this with casualness because, well, they have their a$$es parked in some other part of the world anyway. For them, paper is all there is.

re. ``And . if Pakistan is now doing something to actually combat terrorism, why crib....
So come on now, wake up to reality.Please. ``

Expect to hear something to the effect of ``but the real terrorism is from the U.S., which Pakistan needed to combat more urgently

rgds,
PM

Re: # 89

Hamidm sahib:

``I call you to God and to Islam. If you respond to the call, you are Muslims: You obtain the benefits they enjoy and take up the responsibilities they bear. If you refuse, then [you must pay] the jizyah. If you refuse the jizyah, I will bring against you an army of tribes who are more eager for death than you are for life. We will fight you until God decides between us and you.``

Is the above said anywhere? Where? Not in any religious books or scriptures.

Anil

re. hamidm, #89 ``i know you guys hate women and like living in caves, but most of us don`t .......... ``

Excellent point. It`s all very well for some ass to speak of `national interest` and get all epistimological on the meaning of the word ``nation.`` It`s all to easy when you`ve little or nothinng to lose personally.

#92, anil {````I call you to God and to Islam. If you respond to the call, you are Muslims: You obtain the benefits they enjoy and take up the responsibilities they bear. If you refuse, then [you must pay] the jizyah. If you refuse the jizyah, I will bring against you an army of tribes who are more eager for death than you are for life. We will fight you until God decides between us and you.`` ``}

Anil Bhai,
Actually that was Hamidumdum Sahib`s marriage proposal to the future Mrs. Hamidumdum.

dear Salim, PM, Hamidm2, and all others on this thread barring the Masadi and zeemax types,

Please lend you ears, as fellow human beings, civilised people, and desis.

You have all been a part of a great con. yes a great confidence trick.

If we look the whole mushy saga from a historical perspective we see that there has been, almost always, two categories of people. those who thought him to be thebest thing since sliced bread, and those who were skeptical but gave him the benefit of doubt. Over a period of time the category increased in number. This slowly changed to out right condemnation of the man. of this many of you have been guilty one way or the other.

Now along come Masadi and zeemax and their kind, with their psuedo-madarassah criticism in one case, psuedo-sociological-criticism in another case. What happens. viola the majorty who were critical of Mushy have suddenly become his fan, supporters etc.

As they say mission accomplished. Masadi, zeemax and their kind deserve oscars, nishan-e-agent-provocateur etc.

You guys have been had. Listen to yourselves speak and type out your notes.

typos and corrections:


dear Salim, PM, Hamidm2, and all others on this thread barring the Masadi and zeemax types,

Please lend me your ears, as fellow human beings, civilised people, and desis.

You have all been a part of a great con. yes a great confidence trick.

If we look at the whole mushy saga from a historical perspective we see that there has been, almost always, two categories of people. Those who thought him to be the best thing since sliced bread, and those who were skeptical but gave him the benefit of doubt. Over a period of time the second category increased in number. This group slowly changed their stance to out right condemnation of the man. Of this many of you have been guilty one way or the other.

Now along come Masadi and zeemax and their kind, with their psuedo-madarassah criticism in one case, psuedo-sociological-criticism in another case. What happens? Viola the majorty who were critical of Mushy have suddenly become his fan, supporters etc.

As they say mission accomplished. Masadi, zeemax and their kind deserve oscars, nishan-e-agent-provocateurs etc.

You guys have been had. Listen to yourselves speak and type out your notes.