New LFO Ultra

In the LFOs jaded Constitution, the Absolute Holiness (AH) Musharraf, founder of Sadat/ Delhvi dynasty and Monarch of the Kingdom of New Arabia, who is assisted by pre-retirement retard and retired generals in the first tier followed by corrupt, criminal, convicted and canniving concoction of collaborators in the second tier of power. People of Pakistan are anxiously looking forward to Ummah unity under AH`s revival of Turkish model of Ghalazat - used to be pronounced as Khalafat.

The real question is: is retard AH better than retired AH? And the answer through referendum is: a dismissed AH is both retard and retired, therefore all votes casted are in favor of dismissed irrespective of voters voting for or against AH Musharraf.

Sigh...!!

how we miss the Grands show of `` Dogs Cats (He) Puppies and Pimps ``


..who had the audicity to return 200 + Imported Merecedes or were they BMW ...a small price on the exchequer of this ultra rich country just because they did not liked the color...

While the machiavellian actions of the General won`t find any support in me , especially how he has ushered the Mullah alliance into the power.. but I find this article to be a little too much. I don`t support unelected dictators. However if only for the freedom of speech, Musharraf`s Pakistan is much better than the media controlling obscurantism of the previous Government. The point is valid however... legislation can`t be vested in one person, and if it was somehow from 1999-2002 in Musharraf, why didn`t he do away with the draconian and discriminatory laws that were instituted by a previous dictator?


Musharraf has failed us in a major way. So much for people`s faith in his liberalism.

riffat:

...aaj musharraf kal koi aur jarnail aajaiga...

...musharraf is only a symbol of the tentacular cancer consuming Pakistan…its occupying army

…there are no short cuts or measures to alleviate the suffering of its miserable millions save this…the army has to be confronted/persuaded/eye-balled back into barracks and under civilian control…anything short of this and the decay will continue…

…t

This will annoy a lot of people and they will disagree with me, but it has to be stated.

LFO is a non-issue and the real issue is that Pakistan is ill-suited for a parliamentary style of democracy. Pakistan is an administrative state, whose goverance is more partial to a presidential form of government. The reason, why the post 2002 election Pakistan is not working, because it is a dyarchy of power shared between the president and the prime minister. History of Pakistan has favored a presidential rule and the presidential rule has dominated Pakistani history. Pakistan from 1947 to 1948 was a presidential form of government under Jinnah and Jinnah had monopoly on power. From 1948 to 1958, Pakistan tried to establish a parliamentary democracy, but could not due to the martial law of 1958. From the 1958 to 1972, it was a presidential form of government and when Bhutto came to power, he did as the president of Pakistan. Bhutto wrote a constitution and became a prime minister, but ruled like a president amassing all the powers in his hand. Zia continued with this presidential tradition and experimented with a parliamentary democracy, but rejected it. Benazir Bhutto was a prime minister harboring presidential hopes and so was Nawaz Sharif, who ruled more like a caliph than a prime minister. Musharraf has merely continued the tradition.

The first elections, free and fair elections in the history of Pakistan were held in 1970 nearly 23 years after gaining independence. Even during its first decade of democracy, 1948-58, Pakistan had governments appointed and dismissed without holding elections. Z. A. Bhutto came to power on the results of 1970 elections, but those elections were for an united Pakistan and for Bhutto to claim electoral majority post 1970 elections in 1972 was a myth. The seperation of East Pakistan into Bangladesh invalidated those elections and new elections should have been held, but they never were.

The next elections were in 1989, when Benazir Bhutto came to power and if a line is traced, Pakistan finally had an election nearly 42 years after gaining independence. Here we have a dicotomy. If Pakistan, as it exists today, was created in 1971, then it took us 18 years to hold our first elections and if it was considered to have been created in 1947, then 42 years had gone by before we held our first elections!

Musharraf has not failed any one. It is we who have failed ourselves for thinking and believing that Musharraf would not fail us. Pakistanis have twisted their history so much and to the extent, they know very little of their history except to consign blame in the contempory sense. We have cheered every man who has come on a horse back promising us the bounty of the kingdom of heaven and we accepted his lies. The Romans used to say caveat emptor - buyer beware and we have bought all the lies that were sold to us and hence, we cannot rightly blame the seller. If the product was defective, why did we buy it?

Should we be disappointed in Musharraf or ourselves - you decide!

Ciao

for someone who has gotten four articles published in s.a. tribune, the author is not very bright. i say this because author ignores two major transgressions committed by mush albeit one relatively minor in comparison to the other.

mush, given all he had done for the mullahs, was concerned that his base i.e. the mullahs would get complacent and not turn out to vote in the elections. so to shake them out of their stupor, mush decided to make them mad. and he chose a particularly vicious strategy to achieve this diabolical goal. he decided to give minorities, the right to vote. important to remember that even a die-hard liberal like r.a.t chose to not to touch this for the fear of giving life to forces that could not be controlled. this however is a minor transgression in the long list of transgression committed by mush and hence excusable that it does not merit a mention. what is inexcusable is the non-mentioning of the unmentionable. i am too much of a coward to say this in public. however, i expect a lot more from a contributor to s.a. tribune.

tailpiece: today a swiss judges ruled against the liberal queen and the price of darkness in a case of illegal amassing of foreign wealth. swiss judges dont come cheap. wonder how much of our precious foreign reserves were wasted to get this result. btw n.s. also lost a case bought against him in london by an arab bank. cant think of another country where two democratically elected have been found guilty of corruption by foreign courts.

Here`s a news item on bibi ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3125277.stm

I can`t help but wonder ... what`s the word on Mushharraf and the boys?
Is he also stashing away like bibi and others?

feroz

...good post...laikin yeh sub tou baad ki baat hay...pehlay tou army say peecha chuRana hay...warna kuch nahi hoga...

faisaluno

cant think of another country where two democratically elected have been found guilty of corruption by foreign courts

...just wondering...in a free pakistan of some future date in schools will this be taught under what heading history or ideology?

sattar2

... what`s the word on Mushharraf and the boys?

...the jury is out on this...his interests in wine and women are well known...but some like cowasjee say he is above reprocah in this regard ... and yet others say he is making/stashing it through his elder brother in chicago...guess in true islamic fashion i can end this with `wallah aalam bissawaab` ;)

..t

Musharraf is not above criticism. There is no justification to be critical of 9 out of 10 and not 10 out of 10. Most of the people opposing Musharraf has shown little love for BB or NS. It is pathetic to see people trying to protect Musharraf by lambasting BB and NS or using macrview to obscure the microanalysis, which has been the clear intention of the author. Perhaps later today or tomorrow another two-pager might be on its way here blaming everything on lack of education and feudalism and two equally bad extremes. And naother person trying to save Musharraf by pointing out real issues as bread and butter.

Who has ever denied all these nightmares and quagmires Pakistan has been through. I know well the motives of ultrasmart interactors, to camoflauge Msuharraf from all the evils and his own blunders for this extremely power hungry non-politician.

The brushing aside with macro-level factors can not hide the micro-level and realtime matters from average interactor. BB and NS can use the same strategy to keep pointing finger at feudalism, lack of education and the inherent problems of parliamentary system in order to keep amassing wealth and keep holding on to power.

Here is my macro-level analysis in response to the use of macro-level topics for protecting Musuharraf. Musharraf is wrong; he has done many thing illegal; he is a cheat and used his COAS position to grab power by crook. He was dismissed rightfully for the right reasons but through poor planning by a corrupt but legal prime minister of Pakistan. He has never even offered satisfying answer to sacrificing more than 500 soldiers and young officers at Kargil. He is a criminal and should be tried for highest treason.

sameerJB

...who said musharraf is above criticism?...

...why lambast an individual when the institution is wrong?...mushy is just another name...if it suits the Army (read the Corps Commanders) it would replace him with another...and the rape would continue...

Sameer:

I agree with Ttemporal. Musharaff and others who came before him are a product of their institutional environment. Two armies came into being side by side. One has the vision of Mmanifest Destiny, the other does not. That is what needs to be examined.

Temporal:

One thing Mushy has done is removed the mystique of Army rule for some time to come. The contempt I see for Military (General Staff only) was not there before.

A grade 22 officer who had taken an oath to abide by the consitution has violated the oath; and is calling the shots.

The 342-member national assembly sits scratching b....

The despicable lot is the Q-leauge which is supporting the officer.

Tragic.

Riffat. Thanks for highlighting.

tis the kind of thing i wud expect to read on SA Tribune...in fact i enjoy reading SA tribune cuz i thinkit makes a wonderful satire read. ditto for this one...

this is in response to Reply No 5:
Well, I dont think that Pakistan is ill-suited to parliamentary democracy. Pakistan`s presidents did enjoy long terms in the office, but that was not because presidential system suited Pakistan, it was because these presidents had army behind them. Ayub and Zia both were Army Chief.
As far as the matter of Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif is cocerned, it does not mean they wanted to have presidential system, they just want total control on Pakistan`s affairs. Actually, every one of Pakistani rulers, no matter whether military man or elected politician had tried to prolong his or her own rule.
Some people in Pakistan think that Bibi is the only option left for Pakistanis. Well, if you look at her attitued towards Musharraf in last three years, you would see that it is not actually Musharraf`s dictatorship that she is so furiously against, if today, Musharraf allows her to come back, and take up charge as prime minister, she would have to qualms in sharing power with a military dictator.

One needs to see the spoof on Mush (apart from those on other Indian politicians) in the NDTV puppet serial `Gustakhi Muaf` . It is really hilarious.

while legalising the millatry govt, the SC in Zafar Ali Shah case, allowed the general to amend the constitution but even then he was not given a free hand to do whtever he felt like to do..the amendments were allowed just to achieve the objectives laid down by the general in his first speech which included revival of `true` democracy, accountability and coupla others..but wht this set of amendements provide r a dummy parliament n all the ways to prolong n strenghthen general`s dictatorship n those as ministers n higher officials who were supposed to b accountable...once again this all s ultra vires even whn we see it in the light of the ``historic judgement`` which general once used to keep quoting most of the time to justify his all acts...
i always think that oppinion making s always a first step..let them teach enlightened moderation or whtever which s likely to prolong n strenghethn their rule...all we need s just few more eye openers like RIFAT n thats it...well done

Riffat Jahan,

I understand your pain and salute your sense of humour. Theere is nothing that people everywhere deserve better than democracy. I hope that the dictatorship in your country passes and your people can enjoy freedom again.

Every human being on earth deserves this.