Democracy, not terror, is the engine of political Islam

#62 Posted by tahmed32,

Let's examine what the CJ movement did and what it cannot do.

The newly independent CJ, and perhaps the superior judiciary CAN do, is to interpret the constitution in its letter and spirit - and NOT as to the moral aspects of any amendments brought into it by the Parliament. Are we clear so far?

Now, the dilemma of the SC is over the Qazi Hussain petition and the 17th amendment. The 17th amendment, lawfully brought by a 2/3rd majority of the parliament, states that firstly the 'President' is indeed a legitimate 'President'; Secondly the 'President' can hold two offices till end December 2007; and Thirdly that the presidential elections can be held two months BEFORE the term of the parliament expires. (It used to be AFTER but was substituted in the LFO which was made integral by 17th amendment)

Now what does all the above mean? It means the President CAN be elected IN uniform BY a simple majority of an assembly for FIVE years which itself only has two months to live.

This is morally repugnant, but perfectly legal.

In the above case, what can the SC do? It's not there to rule on the 'morality' of amendments, but merely their interpretation. So the SC verdict is a foregone conclusion.

The people who broke the morality are the parliamentarians.

Above is why your optimism over the freedom of the courts and democracy in the free and fair elections is completely misplaced. None of the above can deliver 'justice'.

Negotiated democrazy,

So many pakistanis are hopeful of a bright future after the return of banazir, but the fact is that there will be negotiations with the mullahs and the islamic party also will be part of teh power sharing deal.

Now the jihadis have demonstrated their military and political strenghts and seeing the mass surrenders of teh troops, it is definite that the army will include them as part of any political chage.

zeemax #62 That is the best description I have read so far on the dilemma Pakistanis are faced with today, so thanks for taking the time to spell it out. And this is indeed a critical time in Pakistan's history when things could swing in any direction. All we (i.e. Pakistanis not actively engaged in the crisis) can do at this stage is hope and pray for a return to democracy and the rule of law without bloodshed. One can only speculate though on where Pakistan will be an year from now, or five years from now. This is the "gift" that military rule has given Pakistan!!

One thing is clear - the Chief Justice proved more damaging to Musharraf's rule outside office than he can perhaps be (for reasons you provide) inside office. That is one ray of hope I see - since he is the only national level figure today in Pakistan who commands respect from the vast majority of the population and whom Musharraf and co. dare not openly confront anymore, and behind whom a good number of the petty politicians (religious and mainstream) are happy to line up.

Re: # 64

So Zeemax,
How then will we get this Islamic revolution? The sort of Islam advocated by al-Qaeda and the Lal Mosque crew is not so popular with most pakistanis.

Re: # 64

So Zeemax,
How then will we get this Islamic revolution? The sort of Islam advocated by al-Qaeda and the Lal Mosque crew is not so popular with most pakistanis.

Re: # 24 Posted by HP on September 21, 2007 8:23:51 am

You have identified the strategy that tinpot dictators/politicians in countries such as Pakistan, have always used.

[The purpose was to stave off the US pressure from the Army regime in Pakistan. A tactics they may still use, if the situation begins to get out of hand.]

Due to their own mis-management these people blame the US and drum up street protests. Then of course, we have comments from people like masadi.

Al quada army of pakistan.

Army men refusing to fight the tribals, what next, hand over the bomb.

from jang of today, editorial
/////////////////////////////////
Bin Laden said that it was "obligatory" on every "follower" to fight President Musharraf and the Pakistan Army and anyone who helps them. By doing so, he is in all probability sending a message to his followers to continue their attacks against the Pakistani armed forces and is also trying to create divisions within their rank and file.

There have been reports --though denied by ISPR -- of misgivings among at least some paramilitary units, including one this week which said that six soldiers posted in the area where 15 FC personnel were abducted and later killed by militants refused to carry out orders and left their posts.

The military's response to these threats is reassuring but also expected. Its constitutional duty is to guard against external and internal threats and fighting militants, extremists and their sympathizers is something that should concern it. The only problem -- and it isn't a small one -- is that many ordinary people do not have a necessarily negative view of Osama Bin Laden. After all, this is not based on anecdotal evidence but has been confirmed and re-confirmed in several surveys taken over the past few years. The most recent one was conducted by a US-based think-tank in August and in it 46 per cent of the sample of Pakistanis polled had a favourable view of Bin Laden, compared to 38 per cent who thought the same for President Musharraf.

#69,

The islamic ideas have nothing to do with public support. Only 100 Km from islamabad, the barber shops ahve closed down and they no more shave beards, and barbers doing that will be killed.

The jihadis are at the door step, wake up the elites of pakistan.

Re: # 65

Pee Max,

Probably the best post on this board but not good enough for your faux pas on Behtullah Meshud.

#69 Posted by Naqshbandi,

The sort of Islam the Lal Masjid crew was agitating for was in fact a lot milder than what you have in Saudia, or even Iran.

Besides, where people make the usual mistake is that the Lal Msajid movement was mainly social, and not theocratic. There was a lot of disinformation of-course about forced CD burnings and threats of acid throwing etc which are all false.

... missed this:

The sort of Islam advocated by al-Qaeda and the Lal Mosque crew is not so popular with most pakistanis.

Due to the reason that the Lal Mosque movement was for mainly social reasons, it does have enough support where it matters. Of-course, it would not have any support in the intelligentsia or the liberal elite, but they do not matter.

That the Chief Justice (CJ) of the Supreme Court (SC) denied to hear the case against Musharraf who's done utmost to illegally oust the CJ on the grounds of the possible involvement of his personal feelings against his enemy -- or at least to rule out the perception of the observers -- looks prima facie a moral act.

A closer look, however, brings the severity of the situation to light and this is the incapability of the CJ -- no matter how moral his reasoning is -- to rule in probably the most important case of the recent history of Pakistan. It simply means that in such an important time of testing Pakistan has no CJ! And because of his fear of being seen as partial the full bench of SC can't hear the case.

Barring some die-hard supporters of Musharraf like the MQM riffraff most sane people would consider his opinion from the legal perspective and not from that of the ruling junta.

#76 Posted by zahid_e_khushk,

There's a technical point here. The case's plea is to decide on the legality of the uniform, which is quite legal. However if the case had challenged the 17th amendment ITSELF as being against the 'spirit' of the 1973 constitution, it would be a different story. But of-course Qazi couldn't do that because he was in the forefront of making that amendment in the first place.

I suspect if the 17th amendment had been challenged, the CJ would have sat on the bench and then it would certainly have been a full bench of the SC. As it is, this case is just petty and the SC remarks indicate the court thinks so too.

Re: # 75

zeemax,

.... what can be more 'elitist' than posting a picture of your burgundy mercedes slk while your impoverished iman crazed compatriots were holed up in the mosque fighting for your cause ?.... shame on you !

#78 Posted by hamidm2,

Islam does not celebrate poverty, nor does it abhor riches.

And what makes you think I'm not fighting for the cause as well? :)

zeemax,
thanks for your answers...:-)
but the 'elite' [kanjaroons] will fight tooth and nail to prevent the rise of a genuinely popular islamic movement; the peasants/working classes are already completely islamicised, and the middle class is becoming so. once the popularity for an islamic movement hits the middle classes in earnest then no force will stop it.