The Dirty Tricks Brigade Tries to Spoil a Party
Beena Sarwar January 15, 2008
#253 Posted by Skeptical on January 24, 2008 9:21:05 pm
Gentleman this is some thing which all of you must read...........
Junta versus Janata by Shekhar Gupta, The Indian Express
Published on January 21, 2008
The Indian politician bumbles, the Pakistani general strides purposefully in his natty suits. Guess who keeps his country stable. Pakistanis surely coin more colourful political slogan than us. They are also less subtle. So, the next time you see visuals of a PPP protest rally on your TV screens following Benazir¡¦s assassination, strain your ears a bit to catch a most telling slogan: Amreeka ne kutta paala, vardi waala, vardi waala. It would lose much flavour in transliteration, but the meaning would not be lost on even a non-Hindi speaker. Now when was the last time you had the army called a dog, and that too an American poodle, on Pakistan¡¦s streets? And this is a Pakistan under an almighty (lately, former) general who has the power to declare and suspend emergency in televised speeches, the power to make 36 (or thereabouts) amendments in his ¡§constitution¡¨ at a press conference, and whose ability to take the biggest decisions on the spot is the envy, often, of the Indian politician, and has been a cause for admiration among India¡¦s chattering classes.
How many times, since he came on his first visit for the Agra summit, have we heard fellow Indians, including serious, knowledgeable people, talk of him with a sense of awe? See, how confident he looks, how well he speaks, the swagger, so impressive, knows his mind, is so fit and energetic, so much in control, so macho, can-do and so on. The sub-text was, view this is total contrast with our own political class: overweight, badly dressed, clumsy, evasive in their answers, indecisive, inarticulate and, horror of horrors, not even able to speak any English.
And then came Shaukat Aziz, on secondment from Citibank. So smart, articulate, in his smartly cut suits, blah, blah and blah. And what kind of people did we have holding the same job in India? Gowda, who slept in Parliament. Vajpayee, who never seems to answer any question. Gujral who only uttered diplomatic platitudes that meant nothing. And Narasimha Rao, who mostly pretended he had not even heard the question.
Now let me tell you a few stories. Not necessarily connected either by timing or context, but yielding an interesting conclusion, nevertheless.
¡E One of the great untold stories of the Agra summit is how challenging it was for both Vajpayee and Musharraf to deal with each other. One thought he had the answer even before a question had been asked. The other would think for ever, and often tire out his interlocutor. Apparently at one of the mid-day review sessions Musharraf shared his exasperation with his aides. He said something like, I know you guys told me he takes time responding to anything, but how do I deal with somebody who takes so long and then says nothing? A bit like John McEnroe tossing his racket in exasperation while playing Ramesh Krishnan and screaming: how do I play this guy? He serves at five miles per hour!
One of his aides tried to suggest that Vajpayee takes so long because he is processing Musharraf¡¦s question in his wise, old head. Musharraf was still irritated and somebody senior in his inner council said, with humour laced with disdain: to unka processor Pentium nahin, 286 hoga (then his processor must be a 286, not a Pentium).
¡E Now listen to the story from the other end. What exasperated Vajpayee most of all was Musharraf¡¦s cocky ¡§decisiveness¡¨. ¡§You are the prime minister, I am the president, if we agree on something, let¡¦s sign,¡¨ he would say, while at the same time making changes on the draft of a likely agreement and asking Vajpayee to okay it. He simply wouldn¡¦t buy Vajpayee¡¦s argument that he had a cabinet to go back to. ¡§Par aap prime minister hain. Aap faisla keejiye (but you are the prime minister, you decide),¡¨ Musharraf would say. So when Vajpayee briefed his aides and fellow members of the Cabinet Committee on Security (who, barring George Fernandes, were in Agra), he said about his counterpart pretty much the opposite of what he said of him: ¡§He is in such a hurry. Kuchch sochne ko taiyyar nahin hain. Sub kuch faisala abhi chahte hain, kaise samjhaoon bhai.¡¨ Or words to that effect.
¡E In the main lounge of the Congress Centre at Davos, Switzerland, where all kinds from heads of state to global corporate leaders to rock stars to ordinary journalists congregate and rub shoulders during the World Economic Forum January meeting, I found my old friend, Pakistani journalist, part-time politician, now a full-time exile, Boston University professor and also an Indian Express columnist, Husain Haqqani. As we exchanged gossip, Shaukat Aziz walked past, accompanied by a couple of minders, perfectly cut suit, pompous, smug smile and all. Just that morning he had lectured many of us senior editors over breakfast, laying down the law for India: nothing would move, the gas pipeline, even the permission to Indian private airlines to fly to Pakistan unless the ¡§core¡¨ issue was addressed. Again there was some admiration for his confidence and clarity even among the Indian contingent as he was ¡§so unlike our bumbling politicians¡¨.
Haqqani¡¦s eyes were now lit up with mischief. He pointed his finger directly at Aziz and said: ¡§You know what they say, Davos is the Disneyland of the mind. If that be so, there goes its Mickey Mouse.¡¨
How have the relative fortunes of the two competing kinds of leaderships and nations under their charge evolved over these seven years? Musharraf now looks bumbling and unconvincing, an international joke, a pitiable, forlorn figure, hated by his countrymen, distrusted by the world and mentioned dismissively even by Barack Obama. Shaukat Aziz has disappeared from the scene, even losing out to an ordinary mortal ¡X coincidentally from India ¡X for the top job in his alma mater, Citi. Their country is a mess, their own army, for the first time, is seeing its credibility, power, its pre-eminent position in Pakistan¡¦s society and power structure questioned. Its political class is decimated, its institutions fatally wounded. How do people as proud as the Pakistanis feel when their dictator offers to salvage his credibility by summoning the Scotland Yard to investigate the assassination of their most prominent political leader? Nobody believes their election commission¡¦s intentions, motives or judgment in postponing their election.
Vajpayee, on the other hand, sits at home, having lost power in an election, not in the pink of health, but satisfied at the way his country is moving. His successor, from the opposite side of the political fence, even comes to wish him on his birthday. His country has meanwhile had many more state elections and another general election within a year or so will give his successors in his own party another crack at power. Now, think, who finally won. The indecisive, inarticulate, ineffective slob who did not seem to have an answer to anything, or the macho, confident, smart, decisive, modern smartie who seemed to have an answer to everything?
There are many interesting, and important conclusions to be drawn from this complex argument. But the most significant is this: a modern nation needs democracy and so it needs its politicians, however clumsy, corrupt, effete and power-crazed they may be. Because a military dictator can also be all of these things. The difference is, the political leader draws his power from the democratic process, so he has a stake in preserving that system, howsoever cynical he may be. The general draws his power by throttling the democratic system and its institutions and you can see the results of that in Pakistan. So, in a democracy, howsoever powerful a Lalu or Mayawati, they have to shut up and listen when the Supreme Court speaks. The election commission can publicly upbraid both Sonia Gandhi and Narendra Modi. We, the media, can question and curse who we want. It happens because the political class has the biggest stake in the democratic process, howsoever much it may wish to manipulate it. In contrast, a military dictator owes his power to the absence of institutions, of checks and balances. That is exactly what Musharraf has done to his judiciary, the election commission and even the media. That is why he has to summon the Scotland Yard to investigate Benazir¡¦s assassination
Junta versus Janata by Shekhar Gupta, The Indian Express
Published on January 21, 2008
The Indian politician bumbles, the Pakistani general strides purposefully in his natty suits. Guess who keeps his country stable. Pakistanis surely coin more colourful political slogan than us. They are also less subtle. So, the next time you see visuals of a PPP protest rally on your TV screens following Benazir¡¦s assassination, strain your ears a bit to catch a most telling slogan: Amreeka ne kutta paala, vardi waala, vardi waala. It would lose much flavour in transliteration, but the meaning would not be lost on even a non-Hindi speaker. Now when was the last time you had the army called a dog, and that too an American poodle, on Pakistan¡¦s streets? And this is a Pakistan under an almighty (lately, former) general who has the power to declare and suspend emergency in televised speeches, the power to make 36 (or thereabouts) amendments in his ¡§constitution¡¨ at a press conference, and whose ability to take the biggest decisions on the spot is the envy, often, of the Indian politician, and has been a cause for admiration among India¡¦s chattering classes.
How many times, since he came on his first visit for the Agra summit, have we heard fellow Indians, including serious, knowledgeable people, talk of him with a sense of awe? See, how confident he looks, how well he speaks, the swagger, so impressive, knows his mind, is so fit and energetic, so much in control, so macho, can-do and so on. The sub-text was, view this is total contrast with our own political class: overweight, badly dressed, clumsy, evasive in their answers, indecisive, inarticulate and, horror of horrors, not even able to speak any English.
And then came Shaukat Aziz, on secondment from Citibank. So smart, articulate, in his smartly cut suits, blah, blah and blah. And what kind of people did we have holding the same job in India? Gowda, who slept in Parliament. Vajpayee, who never seems to answer any question. Gujral who only uttered diplomatic platitudes that meant nothing. And Narasimha Rao, who mostly pretended he had not even heard the question.
Now let me tell you a few stories. Not necessarily connected either by timing or context, but yielding an interesting conclusion, nevertheless.
¡E One of the great untold stories of the Agra summit is how challenging it was for both Vajpayee and Musharraf to deal with each other. One thought he had the answer even before a question had been asked. The other would think for ever, and often tire out his interlocutor. Apparently at one of the mid-day review sessions Musharraf shared his exasperation with his aides. He said something like, I know you guys told me he takes time responding to anything, but how do I deal with somebody who takes so long and then says nothing? A bit like John McEnroe tossing his racket in exasperation while playing Ramesh Krishnan and screaming: how do I play this guy? He serves at five miles per hour!
One of his aides tried to suggest that Vajpayee takes so long because he is processing Musharraf¡¦s question in his wise, old head. Musharraf was still irritated and somebody senior in his inner council said, with humour laced with disdain: to unka processor Pentium nahin, 286 hoga (then his processor must be a 286, not a Pentium).
¡E Now listen to the story from the other end. What exasperated Vajpayee most of all was Musharraf¡¦s cocky ¡§decisiveness¡¨. ¡§You are the prime minister, I am the president, if we agree on something, let¡¦s sign,¡¨ he would say, while at the same time making changes on the draft of a likely agreement and asking Vajpayee to okay it. He simply wouldn¡¦t buy Vajpayee¡¦s argument that he had a cabinet to go back to. ¡§Par aap prime minister hain. Aap faisla keejiye (but you are the prime minister, you decide),¡¨ Musharraf would say. So when Vajpayee briefed his aides and fellow members of the Cabinet Committee on Security (who, barring George Fernandes, were in Agra), he said about his counterpart pretty much the opposite of what he said of him: ¡§He is in such a hurry. Kuchch sochne ko taiyyar nahin hain. Sub kuch faisala abhi chahte hain, kaise samjhaoon bhai.¡¨ Or words to that effect.
¡E In the main lounge of the Congress Centre at Davos, Switzerland, where all kinds from heads of state to global corporate leaders to rock stars to ordinary journalists congregate and rub shoulders during the World Economic Forum January meeting, I found my old friend, Pakistani journalist, part-time politician, now a full-time exile, Boston University professor and also an Indian Express columnist, Husain Haqqani. As we exchanged gossip, Shaukat Aziz walked past, accompanied by a couple of minders, perfectly cut suit, pompous, smug smile and all. Just that morning he had lectured many of us senior editors over breakfast, laying down the law for India: nothing would move, the gas pipeline, even the permission to Indian private airlines to fly to Pakistan unless the ¡§core¡¨ issue was addressed. Again there was some admiration for his confidence and clarity even among the Indian contingent as he was ¡§so unlike our bumbling politicians¡¨.
Haqqani¡¦s eyes were now lit up with mischief. He pointed his finger directly at Aziz and said: ¡§You know what they say, Davos is the Disneyland of the mind. If that be so, there goes its Mickey Mouse.¡¨
How have the relative fortunes of the two competing kinds of leaderships and nations under their charge evolved over these seven years? Musharraf now looks bumbling and unconvincing, an international joke, a pitiable, forlorn figure, hated by his countrymen, distrusted by the world and mentioned dismissively even by Barack Obama. Shaukat Aziz has disappeared from the scene, even losing out to an ordinary mortal ¡X coincidentally from India ¡X for the top job in his alma mater, Citi. Their country is a mess, their own army, for the first time, is seeing its credibility, power, its pre-eminent position in Pakistan¡¦s society and power structure questioned. Its political class is decimated, its institutions fatally wounded. How do people as proud as the Pakistanis feel when their dictator offers to salvage his credibility by summoning the Scotland Yard to investigate the assassination of their most prominent political leader? Nobody believes their election commission¡¦s intentions, motives or judgment in postponing their election.
Vajpayee, on the other hand, sits at home, having lost power in an election, not in the pink of health, but satisfied at the way his country is moving. His successor, from the opposite side of the political fence, even comes to wish him on his birthday. His country has meanwhile had many more state elections and another general election within a year or so will give his successors in his own party another crack at power. Now, think, who finally won. The indecisive, inarticulate, ineffective slob who did not seem to have an answer to anything, or the macho, confident, smart, decisive, modern smartie who seemed to have an answer to everything?
There are many interesting, and important conclusions to be drawn from this complex argument. But the most significant is this: a modern nation needs democracy and so it needs its politicians, however clumsy, corrupt, effete and power-crazed they may be. Because a military dictator can also be all of these things. The difference is, the political leader draws his power from the democratic process, so he has a stake in preserving that system, howsoever cynical he may be. The general draws his power by throttling the democratic system and its institutions and you can see the results of that in Pakistan. So, in a democracy, howsoever powerful a Lalu or Mayawati, they have to shut up and listen when the Supreme Court speaks. The election commission can publicly upbraid both Sonia Gandhi and Narendra Modi. We, the media, can question and curse who we want. It happens because the political class has the biggest stake in the democratic process, howsoever much it may wish to manipulate it. In contrast, a military dictator owes his power to the absence of institutions, of checks and balances. That is exactly what Musharraf has done to his judiciary, the election commission and even the media. That is why he has to summon the Scotland Yard to investigate Benazir¡¦s assassination
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#252 Posted by Urstruly on January 24, 2008 9:58:46 am
Re: # 251 hamidm
Father Raymond eh? Now it makes sense why you are so repulsed by anything religious. Look what happened in the past was a painful nightmare; but every nightmare is always follwed by a bright sunny day. Yes it is tru that that nightmare tore you apart but life is nothing but second chances. Time heals all kinds of wounds no matter how deep and how wide. Just forgive and forget for something that you had no control over. You were just a kid. It was not your fault.
Father Raymond eh? Now it makes sense why you are so repulsed by anything religious. Look what happened in the past was a painful nightmare; but every nightmare is always follwed by a bright sunny day. Yes it is tru that that nightmare tore you apart but life is nothing but second chances. Time heals all kinds of wounds no matter how deep and how wide. Just forgive and forget for something that you had no control over. You were just a kid. It was not your fault.
#251 Posted by hamidm2 on January 23, 2008 2:32:31 pm
Re: # 249
fuzair mian,
... sometimes you have to stretch a point to make a point :)
... by the way i was at st mary's when the rev fr byrne was the principal and ms may flannagan still had nice legs (she died in 2006 - i think tess is still alive) .....we had only eleven boys in our senior cambridge class ....... i was at st patrick's when fr raymond was the principal ....... that was a long long time ago ......... sigh !
fuzair mian,
... sometimes you have to stretch a point to make a point :)
... by the way i was at st mary's when the rev fr byrne was the principal and ms may flannagan still had nice legs (she died in 2006 - i think tess is still alive) .....we had only eleven boys in our senior cambridge class ....... i was at st patrick's when fr raymond was the principal ....... that was a long long time ago ......... sigh !
#250 Posted by bubba on January 21, 2008 4:49:25 pm
Re: # 234 Posted by hamidm2 on January 19, 2008 4:54:54 am
[... personally i support the division of iraq with permanent us bases in kurdistan as in korea ....]
Did you see the latest edition of The Atlantic Monthly? Do you agree with redrawing of the middle-east, Iran and Pakistan? Personally, I think that in the next 20 years or so, we might see a major reconfiguration of the middle-east, which I think will be good for the world.
[... personally i support the division of iraq with permanent us bases in kurdistan as in korea ....]
Did you see the latest edition of The Atlantic Monthly? Do you agree with redrawing of the middle-east, Iran and Pakistan? Personally, I think that in the next 20 years or so, we might see a major reconfiguration of the middle-east, which I think will be good for the world.
#249 Posted by fuzair on January 21, 2008 4:27:23 pm
Sorry, was a post on the forced marriage annulment in Saudi Arabia but for some reason the post got cut.
#248 Posted by fuzair on January 21, 2008 4:21:06 pm
Each time I think Hamidm has gone too far in criticizing Islam, I read some crap like this (
#247 Posted by SR on January 21, 2008 10:23:22 am
Thanks to the 5th Arjun for sucking chowk beta's ass, or whatever it was that he did.
#246 Posted by anil on January 21, 2008 8:48:38 am
Re: # 244
Massaddi Mian:
"...the entire Third World alike..."
Are you still living in the Third World. I thought the Second World was gone long before you emerged from your diapers.
Massaddi Mian:
"...the entire Third World alike..."
Are you still living in the Third World. I thought the Second World was gone long before you emerged from your diapers.
#245 Posted by arjun_5 on January 20, 2008 4:50:37 pm
#243 Posted by anil on January 20, 2008 10:54:00 am
#242 Posted by rf786 on January 20, 2008 9:17:54 am
It's not "my" article neither did I read it before I posted it..I was just posting it as a hotlink for SR because chowk beta sucks ass.
However, I agree with what most of what you say.
#242 Posted by rf786 on January 20, 2008 9:17:54 am
It's not "my" article neither did I read it before I posted it..I was just posting it as a hotlink for SR because chowk beta sucks ass.
However, I agree with what most of what you say.
#244 Posted by masadi on January 20, 2008 11:48:32 am
There is no such thing as fair and free and open competition. Global institutions financial as well as manufacturing are dominated by Western corporations who have monopoly power and are not fools to let others kill them knowingly. Keep dreaming, India and China are getting deeper into the gutter, their people are still dirt poor and until they realize that glitter isn't everything and recognize their true enemies, who are the enemies of humanity and the entire Third World alike, i.e. the US elite and their minions around the globe, they will all remain in the gutter.
#243 Posted by anil on January 20, 2008 10:54:00 am
Re: # 241
Arjun:
I have said it here many times. The world's market based economy is entering a new era. With the arrival of Brazil, Russia, India and China, colonial model of controlling energy and resources is gone. Market will force competition, and as a result there will be better distribution of profits and equuitable distribution of wealth. Western economies from colonial days, controlled energy and other mineral resources. Now, as Hamidm said RFQs have requirement of 60+% Indian contents.
This new model of developmental economy will be based on higher efficiency and productivity, as competition will be open. Then again, Olympics is open competition too, or is it really about who can find a non-detectable performance enhancing drug. This is the new mantra in developmental economy as well. Who can, is who can win. Cocentrate on Today's India, and less on Pakistan.
Arjun:
I have said it here many times. The world's market based economy is entering a new era. With the arrival of Brazil, Russia, India and China, colonial model of controlling energy and resources is gone. Market will force competition, and as a result there will be better distribution of profits and equuitable distribution of wealth. Western economies from colonial days, controlled energy and other mineral resources. Now, as Hamidm said RFQs have requirement of 60+% Indian contents.
This new model of developmental economy will be based on higher efficiency and productivity, as competition will be open. Then again, Olympics is open competition too, or is it really about who can find a non-detectable performance enhancing drug. This is the new mantra in developmental economy as well. Who can, is who can win. Cocentrate on Today's India, and less on Pakistan.
#242 Posted by rf786 on January 20, 2008 9:17:54 am
Re: # 241
arjun_5
FT article has highlighted some very disturbing trends but fails to identify the root cause of increased state ownership.
Growth in China, India and other third world countries has fueled incredible demand for commodities which has led to higher prices and increased revenues for countries rich in resources. Main beneficiaries of this trend was the third world countries that had very little exposure to free markets thus the increase of state or sovereign wealth funds. Developed nations (G-7) continue to be the dominant economies but did not participate in this commodity led rally thus the knee jerk reaction to defend their economies and markets by introducing added regulations.
These are uncertain times with US economy headed into a recession matters could get worse before they are corrected.
arjun_5
FT article has highlighted some very disturbing trends but fails to identify the root cause of increased state ownership.
Growth in China, India and other third world countries has fueled incredible demand for commodities which has led to higher prices and increased revenues for countries rich in resources. Main beneficiaries of this trend was the third world countries that had very little exposure to free markets thus the increase of state or sovereign wealth funds. Developed nations (G-7) continue to be the dominant economies but did not participate in this commodity led rally thus the knee jerk reaction to defend their economies and markets by introducing added regulations.
These are uncertain times with US economy headed into a recession matters could get worse before they are corrected.
#241 Posted by arjun_5 on January 20, 2008 8:48:57 am
#240 Posted by SR on January 20, 2008 7:43:47 am
Re: # 237 bulleya wrote ["... bank ceo's who are now begging arabs for capital ..."]
While your statement has a nice ring to it, I hope you meant it just a rhetorical quip and didn't seriously mean it. It's not just Arab capital, but other Asians' capital also. The issue is investment capital of Foreign Sovereign Funds.
Check out the following 2 items:
1) This is the testimony of Patrick Mulloy before the Senate Committee of Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs :
http://banking.senate.gov/_files/111407_Mulloy.pdf
2) A Financial Times article by Jeffrey Garten, a professor of international trade and finance at the Yale School of Management:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f0f2a32e-c2d6-11dc-b617-0000779fd2ac.html
...SR
(It's a god-damned shame that we cannot imbed font colors or active URL's in the message any more. So you'll have to copy and paste these URLs.)
While your statement has a nice ring to it, I hope you meant it just a rhetorical quip and didn't seriously mean it. It's not just Arab capital, but other Asians' capital also. The issue is investment capital of Foreign Sovereign Funds.
Check out the following 2 items:
1) This is the testimony of Patrick Mulloy before the Senate Committee of Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs :
http://banking.senate.gov/_files/111407_Mulloy.pdf
2) A Financial Times article by Jeffrey Garten, a professor of international trade and finance at the Yale School of Management:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f0f2a32e-c2d6-11dc-b617-0000779fd2ac.html
...SR
(It's a god-damned shame that we cannot imbed font colors or active URL's in the message any more. So you'll have to copy and paste these URLs.)
#239 Posted by arjun_4 on January 19, 2008 9:45:07 am
#235 Posted by bulleya on January 19, 2008 6:45:12 am
india had no success in kashmir with 700,000 soldiers
umm..india controls indian kashmir the last time i checked..and despite your own predictions that it would "banega" pakistan in 5 years after 9/11, that looks quite unlikely except to the most deluded(i.e. pakis)...
OTOH, the paki army's efforts at kashmir banega pakistan have been a miserable failure and only ended up with the paki army ruling pureland and bombing it's own citizens...
india had no success in kashmir with 700,000 soldiers
umm..india controls indian kashmir the last time i checked..and despite your own predictions that it would "banega" pakistan in 5 years after 9/11, that looks quite unlikely except to the most deluded(i.e. pakis)...
OTOH, the paki army's efforts at kashmir banega pakistan have been a miserable failure and only ended up with the paki army ruling pureland and bombing it's own citizens...
#238 Posted by arjun_4 on January 19, 2008 9:42:07 am
#237 Posted by bulleya on January 19, 2008 8:02:50 am
.....usa is already firing its bank ceo's who are now begging arabs for capital.
The US is "begging" arabs for capital? Wouldn't that give arabs great power over US policy...gee..it could even mean they could use their power to give the palis a state and give kashmir to pureland....
I'm thinking of wearing a t-shirt with an arab flag the next time I am in new york...which flag do you think I should use?
.....usa is already firing its bank ceo's who are now begging arabs for capital.
The US is "begging" arabs for capital? Wouldn't that give arabs great power over US policy...gee..it could even mean they could use their power to give the palis a state and give kashmir to pureland....
I'm thinking of wearing a t-shirt with an arab flag the next time I am in new york...which flag do you think I should use?
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- muqaddam: Omar Abdulla is just... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- banneditem: Oye Ehtisham, meet us... Losing the Battle, Losing
- pinku: Indian society never persecuted... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- masadi: banneditem writes "Ras, In my... Three Cups of Tea
- masadi: He says a few... Three Cups of Tea
- masadi: BTW if by some... Three Cups of Tea
- masadi: So the CIA sends... Three Cups of Tea
- pinku: Good job by some... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
