Another One Bites The Dust
Shandana Minhas April 30, 2002
#1 Posted by sadna on April 30, 2002 1:22:58 pm
From Musharraf`s point of view, he has taken a risk `in national interest`.
http://www.dawn.com/2002/04/06/top1.htm
In his speech in early April :
``...I have been advised not to go for referendum but I want to tell the nation today that I am a soldier and I do not fear from danger and I am ready to take the risk in the larger national interest...``
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/2002/04/04/news/nation/2995828.htm
``I believe in taking a calculated risk,`` Musharraf told a group of journalists Saturday, when he first suggested the referendum. ``I want to know whether or not the nation requires me`` to remain in office..``
Whereas any disaffected member of the public may say the referendum was held to serve Musharraf`s purpose, Musharraf says it was held to serve the public`s purpose inspite of the considerable risk and danger to himself. What is the reality?
http://www.dawn.com/2002/04/06/top1.htm
In his speech in early April :
``...I have been advised not to go for referendum but I want to tell the nation today that I am a soldier and I do not fear from danger and I am ready to take the risk in the larger national interest...``
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/2002/04/04/news/nation/2995828.htm
``I believe in taking a calculated risk,`` Musharraf told a group of journalists Saturday, when he first suggested the referendum. ``I want to know whether or not the nation requires me`` to remain in office..``
Whereas any disaffected member of the public may say the referendum was held to serve Musharraf`s purpose, Musharraf says it was held to serve the public`s purpose inspite of the considerable risk and danger to himself. What is the reality?
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#2 Posted by Ras Siddiqui on April 30, 2002 3:34:54 pm
Shandana,
writing like this makes me retain the hope that Pakistan will one day have a future that its former citizens (like myself) can be be proud of.
Touche!
Ras
writing like this makes me retain the hope that Pakistan will one day have a future that its former citizens (like myself) can be be proud of.
Touche!
Ras
#3 Posted by Urstruly on April 30, 2002 4:03:18 pm
Shandana
Thank you for writing this article. This is just the begining of a long, dark night and unfortunately there is no light at the end of the tunnel. The reason, is obvious, everyone knows it, yet they are in denial phase. You said it yourself:
``And who is this mysterious ‘We’ anyway? Is it M and I? Him and George? Gorillas in the mist? The boys in khaki?``
I vehemently disagree with the following. The number of people incarcinated without a charge or a trial is increasing exponentially everyday. And it is expected to continue after the so-called police reforms (effective 5/1) which is Paki version of the infamous, inhuman and draconian Indian law, POTA.....as if MPO (Maintenance of Public Order - an ordinance effective since early 60s) was not enough to creat ``order`` in cattle, I mean public.
``If he is so concerned with extremism why have so many activists of religious organizations been quietly released?``.
Thank you for writing this article. This is just the begining of a long, dark night and unfortunately there is no light at the end of the tunnel. The reason, is obvious, everyone knows it, yet they are in denial phase. You said it yourself:
``And who is this mysterious ‘We’ anyway? Is it M and I? Him and George? Gorillas in the mist? The boys in khaki?``
I vehemently disagree with the following. The number of people incarcinated without a charge or a trial is increasing exponentially everyday. And it is expected to continue after the so-called police reforms (effective 5/1) which is Paki version of the infamous, inhuman and draconian Indian law, POTA.....as if MPO (Maintenance of Public Order - an ordinance effective since early 60s) was not enough to creat ``order`` in cattle, I mean public.
``If he is so concerned with extremism why have so many activists of religious organizations been quietly released?``.
#4 Posted by rozaiba on April 30, 2002 4:42:07 pm
Shandana:
You spoke my heart.
I went to vote (after seriously juggling with the idea of boycotting it). It was the best. During heat of noon time, I was the only person there, and a couple of the elections officials were dozing off.
It`s a great feeling. NEVER seen such a low turn out. Low? It was painful to watch. At each booth, there were like ten elections officials, and never during the day, were they outnumbered by the voters!!! It really does feel great. :)
During the afternoon, the Faujis were probably freaking out so one could see vans shutteling `voters` from other areas to the stations. So screwed up was the voting method, some of the people I spoke with joked on how they voted thrice at three different booths!
The good thing is that the farce is over and the misery millions had to witness as a result of hijacked public transport by the fuking Faujis has come to an end.
You spoke my heart.
I went to vote (after seriously juggling with the idea of boycotting it). It was the best. During heat of noon time, I was the only person there, and a couple of the elections officials were dozing off.
It`s a great feeling. NEVER seen such a low turn out. Low? It was painful to watch. At each booth, there were like ten elections officials, and never during the day, were they outnumbered by the voters!!! It really does feel great. :)
During the afternoon, the Faujis were probably freaking out so one could see vans shutteling `voters` from other areas to the stations. So screwed up was the voting method, some of the people I spoke with joked on how they voted thrice at three different booths!
The good thing is that the farce is over and the misery millions had to witness as a result of hijacked public transport by the fuking Faujis has come to an end.
#5 Posted by cutandpaste on April 30, 2002 4:42:07 pm
An immigrant from India — Dinesh D’Souza — explains why America is still the greatest country in the world
American liberals are fond of blaming their homeland for all the ills of the planet! They hoodwink people (especially in our colleges and schools) every day with the claim that American culture is no better than Third World cultures, and that immigrants should retain their own values when they come here — rather than adopting those of their new countrymen.
But Dinesh D’Souza is one immigrant who’s proud to be an American! In What’s So Great About America, he reveals why he cherishes the memory of the day he became an American in 1991. He explores why America’s enemies within and without hate our country, and explodes PC myths about the evils of the United States. In the process, he reminds you why America is unique, and why every citizen should thank God for this nation — and do his utmost to defend it.
In some of the most provocative anti-PC writing put to paper by anyone in recent years, D’Souza dares to challenge two of the most sacred of liberal sacred cows: colonialism and racism. Sharply and compellingly, he refutes that colonialism stymied the development of the Third World, demonstrating that in fact, the colonial period was good for the colonized countries and the individuals within them. Even more shocking for PC-types, D’Souza takes on the reparations fallacy and details what African-Americans actually owe America! Other themes and topics:
How the world as a whole has been decisively shaped by Western civilization
How the Founding Fathers solved two great problems — the problem of scarcity and the problem of diversity — that were sources of perennial misery and conflict in ancient societies
The September 11 terrorists: were they really bad Muslims? Disquieting evidence that they were motivated by core Islamic principles
What Americans could do today to take the wind out of the sails of foreigners’ critiques of the United States
The multicultural premise that all cultures are equal: how even the most cursory examination shows that it’s patently absurd
How Western civilization has always absorbed ideas and inventions from other cultures — giving it an advantage over more closed cultures (including China and the Muslim world)
Three all-important gifts that colonialists gave to the Indian subcontinent (gifts that would go a long way to solving their political problems today, if they could recover them)
Why America’s critics at home and abroad are wrong when they say that America’s appeal stems solely from the lure of materialism
Islamic theocracies: why these foremost critics of the United States are themselves characterized by misery, discontent, tyranny and inequality
American government: its unmistakable foundation in the principles of the Christian religion
Why the old “melting pot” model of assimilation was better for immigrants than the modern-day multiculturalist stew that keeps them from becoming Americans
Jesse Jackson: the extraordinary chutzpah of this rich, successful man describing himself as a victim of oppression
How America’s moral revolution of the 1960s and 1970s threatens the core freedoms on which our nation is based — but also gives conservatives a tremendous opportunity
Why the American government was not inconsistent to support Islamic fundamentalists against the Soviet Union, but to oppose them now
Multiculturalists: how they become apologists for tyranny when they deny that there are universal standards of human rights
The fundamental difference between the ideal society envisioned by Muslim radicals, and that society as envisioned by most people in the Western world
How the fact of immigration reveals the central fallacy of multiculturalism
The importance of the fact that the modern West is the only civilization to entertain the idea that there is a meaningful pattern in history
Why you should love Western culture even though it has spawned the “culture of death”
Can America succeed in stopping terrorism and liberalizing the Islamic world? What victory depends upon
Why “diversity” has never been, is not, and cannot become the basis for American identity — despite the claims of modern multiculturalist theorists
How the relatively impoverished, backward civilization of medieval Europe became powerful enough to be able to conquer and subdue all the other cultures of the world put together
Ethnocentrism: eye-opening evidence that it is by no means a Western disease
Christianity: why it is the principal source of the key Western idea of progress
How America manages to reconcile people from societies that are warring with each other back home
Why black Americans tend to judge America so much more harshly than do new immigrants
Genocide? Nope: the true story of the European treatment of the Indians of the New World
Is America a racist society? The facts that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton hope you don’t notice
Two strategies that immigrant groups in America can use to achieve success in their new country — and why the more popular one today is a dismal failure
Anti-Americanism: why it is often a way for envious non-Americans to salvage their pride
The biggest threat that the Islamic world faces from America: no, it isn’t the continued existence of Israel or American forces in Saudi Arabia!
Islamic fundamentalism and Christian fundamentalism: the essential difference
Clear-eyed and courageous, What’s So Great About America is essential reading for everyone who wants to be ready with answers the next time liberals start complaining about the evils of the United States. Let this proud American immigrant show them how wrong they are!
American liberals are fond of blaming their homeland for all the ills of the planet! They hoodwink people (especially in our colleges and schools) every day with the claim that American culture is no better than Third World cultures, and that immigrants should retain their own values when they come here — rather than adopting those of their new countrymen.
But Dinesh D’Souza is one immigrant who’s proud to be an American! In What’s So Great About America, he reveals why he cherishes the memory of the day he became an American in 1991. He explores why America’s enemies within and without hate our country, and explodes PC myths about the evils of the United States. In the process, he reminds you why America is unique, and why every citizen should thank God for this nation — and do his utmost to defend it.
In some of the most provocative anti-PC writing put to paper by anyone in recent years, D’Souza dares to challenge two of the most sacred of liberal sacred cows: colonialism and racism. Sharply and compellingly, he refutes that colonialism stymied the development of the Third World, demonstrating that in fact, the colonial period was good for the colonized countries and the individuals within them. Even more shocking for PC-types, D’Souza takes on the reparations fallacy and details what African-Americans actually owe America! Other themes and topics:
How the world as a whole has been decisively shaped by Western civilization
How the Founding Fathers solved two great problems — the problem of scarcity and the problem of diversity — that were sources of perennial misery and conflict in ancient societies
The September 11 terrorists: were they really bad Muslims? Disquieting evidence that they were motivated by core Islamic principles
What Americans could do today to take the wind out of the sails of foreigners’ critiques of the United States
The multicultural premise that all cultures are equal: how even the most cursory examination shows that it’s patently absurd
How Western civilization has always absorbed ideas and inventions from other cultures — giving it an advantage over more closed cultures (including China and the Muslim world)
Three all-important gifts that colonialists gave to the Indian subcontinent (gifts that would go a long way to solving their political problems today, if they could recover them)
Why America’s critics at home and abroad are wrong when they say that America’s appeal stems solely from the lure of materialism
Islamic theocracies: why these foremost critics of the United States are themselves characterized by misery, discontent, tyranny and inequality
American government: its unmistakable foundation in the principles of the Christian religion
Why the old “melting pot” model of assimilation was better for immigrants than the modern-day multiculturalist stew that keeps them from becoming Americans
Jesse Jackson: the extraordinary chutzpah of this rich, successful man describing himself as a victim of oppression
How America’s moral revolution of the 1960s and 1970s threatens the core freedoms on which our nation is based — but also gives conservatives a tremendous opportunity
Why the American government was not inconsistent to support Islamic fundamentalists against the Soviet Union, but to oppose them now
Multiculturalists: how they become apologists for tyranny when they deny that there are universal standards of human rights
The fundamental difference between the ideal society envisioned by Muslim radicals, and that society as envisioned by most people in the Western world
How the fact of immigration reveals the central fallacy of multiculturalism
The importance of the fact that the modern West is the only civilization to entertain the idea that there is a meaningful pattern in history
Why you should love Western culture even though it has spawned the “culture of death”
Can America succeed in stopping terrorism and liberalizing the Islamic world? What victory depends upon
Why “diversity” has never been, is not, and cannot become the basis for American identity — despite the claims of modern multiculturalist theorists
How the relatively impoverished, backward civilization of medieval Europe became powerful enough to be able to conquer and subdue all the other cultures of the world put together
Ethnocentrism: eye-opening evidence that it is by no means a Western disease
Christianity: why it is the principal source of the key Western idea of progress
How America manages to reconcile people from societies that are warring with each other back home
Why black Americans tend to judge America so much more harshly than do new immigrants
Genocide? Nope: the true story of the European treatment of the Indians of the New World
Is America a racist society? The facts that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton hope you don’t notice
Two strategies that immigrant groups in America can use to achieve success in their new country — and why the more popular one today is a dismal failure
Anti-Americanism: why it is often a way for envious non-Americans to salvage their pride
The biggest threat that the Islamic world faces from America: no, it isn’t the continued existence of Israel or American forces in Saudi Arabia!
Islamic fundamentalism and Christian fundamentalism: the essential difference
Clear-eyed and courageous, What’s So Great About America is essential reading for everyone who wants to be ready with answers the next time liberals start complaining about the evils of the United States. Let this proud American immigrant show them how wrong they are!
#6 Posted by Pankaj on April 30, 2002 4:42:07 pm
``“For consolidating the local government system; establishment of democracy; continuation of reforms; end to sectarianism and fundamentalism; and fulfilment of Quaid-i-Azam’s concept of Pakistan, would you like to elect President General Pervez Musharraf as President of Pakistan for five years?”
``
The wordings are indeed very interesting and meant to dupe the layman. A common man reading above lines would think(delusion) that he is voting for Quaid`s Pakistan, democracy etcetera etcetera... while he is actually voting to keep a dictator in power. A simple yet straight sentence like, ``Do you support the extension of General Musharraf`s presidency for another five years``, would have sufficed.
``
The wordings are indeed very interesting and meant to dupe the layman. A common man reading above lines would think(delusion) that he is voting for Quaid`s Pakistan, democracy etcetera etcetera... while he is actually voting to keep a dictator in power. A simple yet straight sentence like, ``Do you support the extension of General Musharraf`s presidency for another five years``, would have sufficed.
#7 Posted by tahmed321 on April 30, 2002 4:42:07 pm
Shandana: So Musharaff came to power the way Zia did (via coup); has now sought to legitimize his power the way Zia did (via referendum); Will he leave power the way Zia did as well (in disgrace, unmourned by any of his countrymen)??
...Or will he prove smarter than that?? To find the answer, standby for the release of the next episode of our ongoing drama titled ``The Great Pakistani Political Circus (A tragi-comedy in many parts)``. This next episode is titled
``(S)election of the Prime Minister, National Assembly``, release due in October. Starring Imran Khan (drum roll), Gohar Ayub (trumpets), and Shaukat Aziz (tabla), and others.
...Or will he prove smarter than that?? To find the answer, standby for the release of the next episode of our ongoing drama titled ``The Great Pakistani Political Circus (A tragi-comedy in many parts)``. This next episode is titled
``(S)election of the Prime Minister, National Assembly``, release due in October. Starring Imran Khan (drum roll), Gohar Ayub (trumpets), and Shaukat Aziz (tabla), and others.
#8 Posted by Romair on April 30, 2002 4:42:07 pm
Are you voting, Yes or No?
Based on whatever you have stated, you will be voting, ``No,`` I assume. Not that it will matter, but you didn`t specify.
There is one factor that is heavily in Musharraf`s favor. Infact, that is the main reason that he is popular. There are plenty of people who could do what he has done. He hasn`t really done anything extraordinary. He has just not been corrupt, and has an honest cabinet, and has tried to manage things in an organized manner. Something that would actually be taken for granted, in any civilized country.
What is that factor? It is the complete incompetency and corruption of all other alternatives. This is why Musharraf`s seemed (seems) like a ray of light. His competition is and was useless. And as long as the ``incompetency of the other`` factor remains, I think people will be more than happy to forgive and forget the referendum, as time passes. And I have a feeling, you may not vote a, ``No.``
There are no perfect dictators in Pakistan. I don`t know why, but there aren`t. Amongst the imperfect dictators (BB, NS, Musharraf etc.), who is the best option? That is the real question that should have been asked, i.e.
``If you think that Pakistan`s version of democracy will always result in feudal-dominated dictatorships. And if you think that of all the possible imperfect dictators that can end up as Pakistani leaders, Musharraf is the best option. And if you think that the PML and PPP leaderships have already robbed the country twice and will rob it again. And if you think BB and NS should never be allowed to come back to Pakistan, then vote for Musharraf``
Based on whatever you have stated, you will be voting, ``No,`` I assume. Not that it will matter, but you didn`t specify.
There is one factor that is heavily in Musharraf`s favor. Infact, that is the main reason that he is popular. There are plenty of people who could do what he has done. He hasn`t really done anything extraordinary. He has just not been corrupt, and has an honest cabinet, and has tried to manage things in an organized manner. Something that would actually be taken for granted, in any civilized country.
What is that factor? It is the complete incompetency and corruption of all other alternatives. This is why Musharraf`s seemed (seems) like a ray of light. His competition is and was useless. And as long as the ``incompetency of the other`` factor remains, I think people will be more than happy to forgive and forget the referendum, as time passes. And I have a feeling, you may not vote a, ``No.``
There are no perfect dictators in Pakistan. I don`t know why, but there aren`t. Amongst the imperfect dictators (BB, NS, Musharraf etc.), who is the best option? That is the real question that should have been asked, i.e.
``If you think that Pakistan`s version of democracy will always result in feudal-dominated dictatorships. And if you think that of all the possible imperfect dictators that can end up as Pakistani leaders, Musharraf is the best option. And if you think that the PML and PPP leaderships have already robbed the country twice and will rob it again. And if you think BB and NS should never be allowed to come back to Pakistan, then vote for Musharraf``
#9 Posted by Urstruly on April 30, 2002 5:27:14 pm
On sunday 4/28, I accidently tunned to CBC (Candian Broadcasting), a chanel that I thought never existed, and was amazed to see what was happening there. I never thought that I would ever be able to see on an English speaking channel what they were showing. They are showing a series of three documentries on middle East. On Sunday they showed documentry on the life and struggle of Yasser Arafat and Palestinians, and yesterday they showed ``The Accused`` which is a documentry on the massacars in Sabra and Shatila refugee camps some 18 years ago. This series has literally put Israel and Jews on trial the very first time. ``The Accused`` is an award winning BBC production which jews tried their best to get banned. I think even if this documentry is not banned in US, no network will ever dare to braodcast it. The great thing about this series is that, they showed this documentry along with some panelists and spectators. Among the panelists were Robert Fisk (my fav. jew), Norman Specter (canadian Ambassador to Israel), Uri (forgetting last name, in charge of fox news), a Palestinian activist (dont remeber his name).
The main argument turned out to be whether Sharon can or should be tried in the newly formed International Criminal Court for his crimes against humanity? The good thing is that the hosts, the cbc, and other panelists refused the zionist propaganda that any thing that criticizes Israel, sharon etc. is anti-semitism. The jewish panelists lowered themselves to a level where they started throwing insults on Robert Fisk (my fav jew), other panelists and spectators.
More info about this documentry is available at:
http://www.cbc.ca/programs/sites/documentaries.html
Personally, I think that the credit for this awakening of humanity in the people of West goes to Osama and the 19 hijakers. This world could have never been so open to everyone without their actions. As heinous and inhuman their crime may be yet it has made people of west catch their governments with their pants down. Everything has two sides to it, like a coin. I pray that the sacrifice of 2900 innocent people who died in WTC, never goes to waste. I hope that their blood will help bring some justice in this world. It is too bad that a tragedy at the level of WTC had to happen to wake the conscience of the people of the world.
A side note for Hindus:
With this newly formed International Criminal Court, and the way people of the world look at the crimes against humanity, I am 100% sure that your army and your politicians who have caused the genocide of Muslims in Kashmir and Gujrat will be brought to justice for their crimes against humanity. The day of reckonning is just around the corner now.
#10 Posted by mithuna on April 30, 2002 8:11:25 pm
FYI and FWIW, Jang is providing updates as votes are counted. The results are tabulated by province and district(?).
http://jang.com.pk/important_events/referendum/
http://jang.com.pk/important_events/referendum/
#11 Posted by Prem on April 30, 2002 8:11:25 pm
http://www.chowk.com/bin/showa.cgi?sminhas_apr3002#INTERACT
After reading this article, and anNy`s, and posts by many Pakistanis, I am far more optimistic about Pakistan`s future than when Musharraf took over. For certain, these voices of principle and reason are still a minority in the midst of widespread and mindnumbing mediocrity. Yet small rational, principled, and humanistic voices can, with persistence, courage, and luck, acquire unique tranformational power.
I sincerely hope that this flame of freedom does not get extinguished, and people do not return to the old follies of falling at the feet of every new messiah.
Meanwhile let us hope, once again, that Musharraf will see light, quit making one-step forward, two step backward moves, and use his enormous powers to bring some radical benefits to the people of Pakistan. No matter how much I distrust him, my best wishes are with him, for he `leads` the Pakistani people. He may (and one hopes he does) yet turn out to be a saladin.
Cut-n-paste
One can appreciate/admire America without dismissing all other cultures. Dinesh D’Souza is one Indian in the US who does not inspire me.
After reading this article, and anNy`s, and posts by many Pakistanis, I am far more optimistic about Pakistan`s future than when Musharraf took over. For certain, these voices of principle and reason are still a minority in the midst of widespread and mindnumbing mediocrity. Yet small rational, principled, and humanistic voices can, with persistence, courage, and luck, acquire unique tranformational power.
I sincerely hope that this flame of freedom does not get extinguished, and people do not return to the old follies of falling at the feet of every new messiah.
Meanwhile let us hope, once again, that Musharraf will see light, quit making one-step forward, two step backward moves, and use his enormous powers to bring some radical benefits to the people of Pakistan. No matter how much I distrust him, my best wishes are with him, for he `leads` the Pakistani people. He may (and one hopes he does) yet turn out to be a saladin.
Cut-n-paste
One can appreciate/admire America without dismissing all other cultures. Dinesh D’Souza is one Indian in the US who does not inspire me.
#12 Posted by bong_dongs on April 30, 2002 8:11:25 pm
``With this newly formed International Criminal Court, ... The day of reckonning is just around the corner now.``
Sure, I`ll personally drag Advani, Sajjan Kumar, Thackrey etc etc right after the entire bunch of Pak GHQ types are cooling their heels in jail, deal?
(oh and also add the Salahuddin`s, Yassin Maliks`s and Diesel Mullah`s of the world)
Sure, I`ll personally drag Advani, Sajjan Kumar, Thackrey etc etc right after the entire bunch of Pak GHQ types are cooling their heels in jail, deal?
(oh and also add the Salahuddin`s, Yassin Maliks`s and Diesel Mullah`s of the world)
#13 Posted by tahmed321 on April 30, 2002 8:11:25 pm
Romair #6 The issue is not competency. The issue is the system. Either we have a proper system for holding political leaders accountable and for being able to replace them, or we do not. Musharaff should have focussed on strengthening checks and balances, democratizing the internal party system, and similar steps to strengthen the system. Instead, Musharaff has deprived Pakistan of any system.
He has gone back on his word (he had asked for 2 years, now he is trying to make it 5). You dont need 7 years to fix a system - you need three months. And then you get out of the way and let the system work to keep people honest and accountable for delivering the goods.
History will not forgive Musharaff, and the Pakistani people will not forgive him. The people of Pakistan have been betrayed by their own leaders.
He has gone back on his word (he had asked for 2 years, now he is trying to make it 5). You dont need 7 years to fix a system - you need three months. And then you get out of the way and let the system work to keep people honest and accountable for delivering the goods.
History will not forgive Musharaff, and the Pakistani people will not forgive him. The people of Pakistan have been betrayed by their own leaders.
#14 Posted by Urstruly on April 30, 2002 10:33:54 pm
bong bong
``Sure, I`ll personally drag Advani, Sajjan Kumar, Thackrey etc etc right after the entire bunch of Pak GHQ types are cooling their heels in jail, deal?``
This is an amazing argument that jews also used vhemently in that debate. According to them ``Sure ICC is a ``good`` idea (wink wink), but then President of USA and Russia will also have to answer to that court, right? right?``. In other words they were trying to scare the governments and leaders of those countries and were trying to pursuade public opinion that they should oppose such courts. Well the cowardly USA already does. Keep one thing in mind that USA has already been convicetd of crimes against humanitty in the International Court of Justice at the complaint of Nicaragua.
The other argument by jews was ``yes, then the great western leaders Churchil, and Air Marshal Harris of RAF must also be brought to justice for their crimes against humanity when they bombed Dresden, Germany in WWII with complete disregard for civilian life form``
Bong bong, what is you and me to do in this cosmic game of checkies, where you and me are just helpless pawns? haiN? My conscience tells me to support any proposal that all m-fkers should be hanged who show complete disregard for human life and rights. Our stance should transcend the boundries, borders and political convictions. What does your conscience say?
``Sure, I`ll personally drag Advani, Sajjan Kumar, Thackrey etc etc right after the entire bunch of Pak GHQ types are cooling their heels in jail, deal?``
This is an amazing argument that jews also used vhemently in that debate. According to them ``Sure ICC is a ``good`` idea (wink wink), but then President of USA and Russia will also have to answer to that court, right? right?``. In other words they were trying to scare the governments and leaders of those countries and were trying to pursuade public opinion that they should oppose such courts. Well the cowardly USA already does. Keep one thing in mind that USA has already been convicetd of crimes against humanitty in the International Court of Justice at the complaint of Nicaragua.
The other argument by jews was ``yes, then the great western leaders Churchil, and Air Marshal Harris of RAF must also be brought to justice for their crimes against humanity when they bombed Dresden, Germany in WWII with complete disregard for civilian life form``
Bong bong, what is you and me to do in this cosmic game of checkies, where you and me are just helpless pawns? haiN? My conscience tells me to support any proposal that all m-fkers should be hanged who show complete disregard for human life and rights. Our stance should transcend the boundries, borders and political convictions. What does your conscience say?
#15 Posted by CoolAL on April 30, 2002 10:50:55 pm
Urstruly #9
* *[A side note for Hindus:
With this newly formed International Criminal Court, and the way people of the world look at the crimes against humanity, I am 100% sure that your army and your politicians who have caused the genocide of Muslims in Kashmir and Gujrat will be brought to justice for their crimes against humanity. The day of reckonning is just around the corner now.] * *
Thank you. :) I enjoyed that one.
I just thought that I would point out to you that when the US is finally finished taking care of business after Sept 11, every other real or imagined ``atrocity`` against the faithful that you claim will pale in comparison. The funny part is that Pakistan will be known to have been a front line ally. I personally like to refer to Pakistan as a ``Frontline Ally in Resisting Terrorism`` or FART (Copyright N
* *[A side note for Hindus:
With this newly formed International Criminal Court, and the way people of the world look at the crimes against humanity, I am 100% sure that your army and your politicians who have caused the genocide of Muslims in Kashmir and Gujrat will be brought to justice for their crimes against humanity. The day of reckonning is just around the corner now.] * *
Thank you. :) I enjoyed that one.
I just thought that I would point out to you that when the US is finally finished taking care of business after Sept 11, every other real or imagined ``atrocity`` against the faithful that you claim will pale in comparison. The funny part is that Pakistan will be known to have been a front line ally. I personally like to refer to Pakistan as a ``Frontline Ally in Resisting Terrorism`` or FART (Copyright N
#16 Posted by perfidy on April 30, 2002 10:50:55 pm
Najam Sethi
Wednesday May 1, 2002
The Guardian
The general and the question that haunts all dictators
My secretary cast four votes in the presidential referendum yesterday: two in favour of General Pervez Musharraf, and two against, in four different polling stations within a kilometre radius. One of my reporters outwitted her by stamping six votes in the general`s favour. The story is much the same across the country. So much for the credibility of the exercise.
One did not expect anything less. If ever a case was meticulously and consciously built up for institutionalised rigging, this was it. No formal identification was required for voting. There were no constituency lists. The opposition was not allowed to canvass votes against the referendum. Millions of government employees were ordered to shape up or ship out.
Billions of rupees were doled out to hire crowds for pro-Musharraf rallies before the referendum and for lugging pro-Musharraf voters to the polling stations. The number of polling booths was increased tenfold. And the voting age was reduced from 21 to 18 years, so that another 20 million voters without any memory of the military`s disastrous interventions in 1958 and 1977 could be added to the kitty.
Why did he do it when every pundit with even a remote memory of the farcical referendum held by General Zia in 1984 had advised against it?
The question of legitimacy haunts every dictator and Gen Musharraf is no exception, however benign his attitude towards the press or however cooperative his response to the international community`s war against terrorism. Thus the common perception is that an overwhelming ``yes`` in the presidential referendum gives Gen Musharraf a degree of civilian legitimacy that is sorely lacking in him. This is buttressed by the fact that the supreme court has said he is entitled to hold such a referendum. But the facts belie this argument.
The supreme court has not said that this referendum can be a constitutional substitute for a presidential election, leaving that issue to be debated and resolved by the parliament that comes into being after the general election in October.
Nor does a referendum, however credible or successful, under a provisional constitutional order legitimising a military coup (which is the legal umbrella under which Gen Musharraf is operating), eliminate the requirement for a parliamentary endorsement after the constitution has been fully restored. Indeed, every action that Gen Musharraf has taken in the last three years will require constitutional sanction by a two-thirds majority in the next parliament. So what is the point of a referendum if, in the ultimate analysis, Gen Musharraf`s fate lies in the hands of a parliament that is yet to be born?
The answer is that the referendum was never meant to be an exercise in acquiring legitimacy. It is an attempt to flex muscle and browbeat intransigent political opponents to join the Musharraf camp, so that a king`s party or alliance can be cobbled to win the next general election and become a dutiful parliamentary appendage to President Musharraf.
Gen Musharraf admitted as much when he told a group of Pakistani editors shortly before he announced the referendum decision that he was conducting this exercise because he wanted ``to get the fence-sitters off the fence``, alluding to the many political stalwarts in the country who had not yet deserted the two mainstream parties led by the two ex-leaders in exile, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, who are opposed to Gen Musharraf. Has he succeeded in his objective of ensuring, as he put it once, an ``upper hand in parliament``?
No. Whatever the government may claim, the opposition will certainly be emboldened by the referendum`s lack of credibility at home and abroad. Indeed, an element of defiance could creep into the main opposition parties, forcing Gen Musharraf to adopt repressive policies, which in turn would hurt his benign image and undermine his credibility further.
The fear is that in the ensuing tussle for the hearts and minds of Pakistanis in the run-up to the October election, Gen Musharraf may be tempted to postpone the elections on some pretext or other, or rig them massively to thwart his opponents. In either case, the real loser will be Pakistan.
Najam Sethi edits the Daily Times and the Friday Times in Lahore
Wednesday May 1, 2002
The Guardian
The general and the question that haunts all dictators
My secretary cast four votes in the presidential referendum yesterday: two in favour of General Pervez Musharraf, and two against, in four different polling stations within a kilometre radius. One of my reporters outwitted her by stamping six votes in the general`s favour. The story is much the same across the country. So much for the credibility of the exercise.
One did not expect anything less. If ever a case was meticulously and consciously built up for institutionalised rigging, this was it. No formal identification was required for voting. There were no constituency lists. The opposition was not allowed to canvass votes against the referendum. Millions of government employees were ordered to shape up or ship out.
Billions of rupees were doled out to hire crowds for pro-Musharraf rallies before the referendum and for lugging pro-Musharraf voters to the polling stations. The number of polling booths was increased tenfold. And the voting age was reduced from 21 to 18 years, so that another 20 million voters without any memory of the military`s disastrous interventions in 1958 and 1977 could be added to the kitty.
Why did he do it when every pundit with even a remote memory of the farcical referendum held by General Zia in 1984 had advised against it?
The question of legitimacy haunts every dictator and Gen Musharraf is no exception, however benign his attitude towards the press or however cooperative his response to the international community`s war against terrorism. Thus the common perception is that an overwhelming ``yes`` in the presidential referendum gives Gen Musharraf a degree of civilian legitimacy that is sorely lacking in him. This is buttressed by the fact that the supreme court has said he is entitled to hold such a referendum. But the facts belie this argument.
The supreme court has not said that this referendum can be a constitutional substitute for a presidential election, leaving that issue to be debated and resolved by the parliament that comes into being after the general election in October.
Nor does a referendum, however credible or successful, under a provisional constitutional order legitimising a military coup (which is the legal umbrella under which Gen Musharraf is operating), eliminate the requirement for a parliamentary endorsement after the constitution has been fully restored. Indeed, every action that Gen Musharraf has taken in the last three years will require constitutional sanction by a two-thirds majority in the next parliament. So what is the point of a referendum if, in the ultimate analysis, Gen Musharraf`s fate lies in the hands of a parliament that is yet to be born?
The answer is that the referendum was never meant to be an exercise in acquiring legitimacy. It is an attempt to flex muscle and browbeat intransigent political opponents to join the Musharraf camp, so that a king`s party or alliance can be cobbled to win the next general election and become a dutiful parliamentary appendage to President Musharraf.
Gen Musharraf admitted as much when he told a group of Pakistani editors shortly before he announced the referendum decision that he was conducting this exercise because he wanted ``to get the fence-sitters off the fence``, alluding to the many political stalwarts in the country who had not yet deserted the two mainstream parties led by the two ex-leaders in exile, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, who are opposed to Gen Musharraf. Has he succeeded in his objective of ensuring, as he put it once, an ``upper hand in parliament``?
No. Whatever the government may claim, the opposition will certainly be emboldened by the referendum`s lack of credibility at home and abroad. Indeed, an element of defiance could creep into the main opposition parties, forcing Gen Musharraf to adopt repressive policies, which in turn would hurt his benign image and undermine his credibility further.
The fear is that in the ensuing tussle for the hearts and minds of Pakistanis in the run-up to the October election, Gen Musharraf may be tempted to postpone the elections on some pretext or other, or rig them massively to thwart his opponents. In either case, the real loser will be Pakistan.
Najam Sethi edits the Daily Times and the Friday Times in Lahore
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- anil: Masadi sahib: Paranoia should... Historian Amaresh Misra on
- thinkingstorm: I found the site,... Rape Survivor Families Struggle
- thinkingstorm: Is there a website... Rape Survivor Families Struggle
- CheGuevara: TS why did you... Rape Survivor Families Struggle
- CheGuevara: Re: # 106 Using personal... MQM - History and
- thinkingstorm: Bijli and Clean water... Rape Survivor Families Struggle
- thinkingstorm: Now now Masadi, even after... Fathers and Daughters
- sahir_shah: Meiraj thank u for... Demon
