A Cinephile’s Choice Some of my favorites, by Genre.

SUSPENSE/ACTION/THRILLER:

The usual suspects
Seven
Ronin
Heat
Lock stock & two smokin` barrels
Snatch
Brave Heart
Frequency
The good, the bad and the ugly
Reservoir dogs
The Battle of Algiers
JFK
U Turn
Things to Do in Denver When You`re Dead
Colors
The Conversation
The Machinist


WAR:

Platoon
Saving Private Ryan
Tora Tora Tora
Hotel Rwanda
Brave Heart


COMEDY:

Henry Fool
My cousin Vinny
Rushmore
A fish called Wanda
Analyse this
Road Trip


SPORTS:

Raging Bull
Any given Sunday

ROMANCE/ROMANTIC COMEDY:

The notebook
Analyse this
Only you
Reality Bites
Notting Hill

HORROR:

Deliria (aka stagefright)

Also, IMDB`s Top 250 list has a lot of good movies to choose from:

http://www.imdb.com/chart/top

The Last Moments of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Re: #19 by tahmed32

What you describe here might very well be true. The author does state in the book that he`s witholding some information in ``national interest``. This could be the info. he`s not revealing.

Pakistan Army does have a penchant for mistreating, hitting and abusing political leaders. In his book ``The way it was``, Brig. Z.A. Khan describes how a Pak Army soldier slaps Mujibur Rehman after his house at Dhan Mandi had successfully been raided. There were also reports of roughing up of Nawaz & Shahbaz Sharif during the 12 October 1999 coup.

As Ahmed Faraz has rightly said:

Pesha var qatilo tum sipahi nahin (You are no soldiers, you professional assassins).

Union Strike One ``#10 by rozaiba on June 15, 2005 2:46am PT
Yes, very well dealt with. Everytime a strike occurs, let`s send in the Army. :D Next time, we should include the Air Force and the Navy (perhaps they could do some exercises on Rawal Lake). ``

Your innocent wish has come true.

Observe a dutiful employee of Pakistan Navy, diligently performing his duty of ensuring smooth operations at PTCL.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050614/481/kar10206141153

Union Strike One Re# 20……….``I think Pakistan Steel Mills may be in the same category. I have heard MQM has filled it with its party members……Much like PPP and PML support strong labor unions in PIA…………… ``

Much like Pakistan Army has filled every lucrative post from Hockey Federation to Telecom Authority to University Chancellorships with retired & serving generals, brigadiers, colonels et al.

Whoever has the power, tries to benefit their own.. be it MQM, PPP, PML or PAP (Pakistan Army Party)

Union Strike One Re# 24 engro is the biggest fertilizer company in pak

Fauji Fertilizer Corporation (FFC) is the largest fertilizer manufacturer in Pakistan.

FFC`s Urea manufacturing facility near Sadiqabad alone is greater than Engro`s (FFC-Sadiqabad approx. 1.3 million ton/annum vs Engro`s approx. 0.95 million tons/annum). If we add Fauji Fertiliser Bin Qasim (Formerly FFC-Jordan), then total fertiliser production capacity of FFC is approx. 2.3 milion tons/annum (including 0.45 Milion tons/annum of DAP production). In 2002 FFC also took over Pak Saudi fertilisers. This would have increased FFC`s capacity even further.

The Sugar Coated Shaft Re#38

``Look at the press, I`ve been around since 1987 and during my years, the press has had the most liberities in the current era. Gen. Zia, Nawaz Shareef, and Benazir Bhutto, their treatment of Najam Sethi is just one of the fine examples of censorship during their respective tenures.``

If you`ve been around since 1987, then I guess you`ll also remember the time when BB came to power.

Pakistani public`s jaws dropped when one fine day back in 1989, they saw PTV showing actual footage of Nawaz Sharif and other opposition leaders. This was a few days after BB had been sworn in as Prime Minister in 1989. People could not believe what they were seeing. For the last 11 years they had been so attuned to listening to the opening lines of PTV News which would usually start with “Sadr-e-Mumlikat Janab Zia Ul Haq neh aaj yeh kaha, Sadr-e-Mumlikat Janab Zia Ul Haq nay aj woh kaha etc. etc”.

And then it became more or less a regular feature. Opposition news and opposition TV footage (no matter for how short a time) being aired on PTV became somewhat of a norm. Heck, they even showed a few clips from the first death anniversary of Zia Ul Haq. This was the guy who hanged BB’s father.

At the same time newspaper reporting became much more open and bold.

After BB’s government was overthrown, Nawaz (a full-fledged Army/ISI man at that time), could not just completely stop what BB had started. He cut down on the footage, but he did not totally curtail it. Why? People had gotten used to the freedom, and even though most of Nawaz’s power as PM in initial days came from army’s backing & support, he still had to cater somewhat to the sentiments of the people. During Nawaz`s tenure, whenever PTV ``missed`` a major opposition news or ``forgot`` to give any coverage to opposition leaders for a few days, the newspaper articles would start screaming and people in the streets would start talking. The pressure would be on & PTV would start showing the stuff again.

So there are at least two points of time in the last two decades when there has been a shift change in the freedom of press. The first was when BB came to power & the second in Musharraf’s times. Once BB started the momentum, there was no turning back. Nawaz slowed it down but did not completely stop it. And Gen. Musharraf needs to be commended for his freedom of press policy.

Just like Najam Sethi, Shaheen Sehbai is also just one of the fine examples. Najam Sethi at least got back home after a few days. Shaheen Sehbai had to flee from his homeland to escape persecution.

The Sugar Coated Shaft ``Those who disagree, need to provide some examples in Asia of countries, who have gotten out of the third-world by mere elections alone.”

Nobody’s saying that mere elections alone are the panacea for all ills. Elections are albeit one part in the larger context of democracy and a reasonable democracy takes time to set up and function.

But as Netizen has put it in #39, neither does dictatorship mean manna will start falling from heaven.

What people who want democracy in Pakistan argue is that based on our history, and the vested interests of the Military in Pakistan, the interests of Pakistan in the long run will be better served in the hands of elected civilians than in the hands of non-elected generals. This conclusion is based on our understanding of the history & politics of Pakistan & the psychology of the army.

There are all types of examples in Asia of generals as well as civilian dictators, as well as democratic civilians turning the fortunes of their countries for the better. And there are also examples of generals and civilians ruining the economies of their countries. So why would Musharraf or Pakistan Army fit into the mould of let’s say South Korea’s Chun Doo-Hwan, instead of Philippines’ Marcos or Indonesia’s Suharto.

Both Ferdinand Marcos-(Dictator-Philippines) & Suharto (Dictator-Indonesia) showed economic prosperity for a few years (just like Musharraf has), but later everything went topsy-turvy, people became disillusioned because of the massive corruption that these guys engaged in and both of them were kicked out. Now their countries have been running under elected civilians for quite some time now (without a “ghairat-mand” army taking over their TV stations).

Both Philippines & Indonesia have gone through massive & severe political crises after the removal of Marcos & Soharto. Those crises would have been more than enough reason for an army like Pakistan’s to jump right in to “bring political stability and law & order”, but the Philippines & Indonesian Army did not. And the result? These two countries have been learning to stand & stumble & will be walking & running in no time.

Japan developed through democracy, South Korea developed through dictatorship, North Korea got screwed under dictatorship, Burma under army is screwed, Bangladesh rejected the army and has been nudging along with democracy, Indonesia & Philippines got screwed under dictatorship, Singapore (no matter what you believe in), has elected civilian leadership. So there are all types of examples.

“Most of all, the case is the fact that everyone on this site is economically well-off, hence is concerned about other issues...........If they were not well-off, they would be worrying about the economy and jobs also...........And many of them don`t want the status-quo to change, which is what rapid economic growth tends to do.....”

Let me try to explain something. Everyone has their own way of drawing conclusions from history and politics and based upon that analysis- to the best of one’s understanding & abilities- one comes up with the best way to understand how Pakistan’s interests can be served better in the long run.

My analysis of how to achieve stability & prosperity for Pakistan can and is different from yours. But basically the goal is the same i.e. to find the best way that will lead to economic prosperity for the people of Pakistan.

You believe Pakistan’s interests are best served through Musharraf. I believe this will not be sustainable in the future and some crazy general can reverse everything in a flash. Our goal is the same. We only disagree on what is the best method to achieve it. We both want the status-quo to change. Only to you Musharraf is changing the status quo, whereas to me, the more time army spends in politics the more it preserves the status quo. I agree with Temporal’s assessment of: “let the child stand, stumble, walk, run through trial and error”

So this “many of them don’t want status-quo to change” is simply not true. We all want the status quo to change, but we disagree on which route should be taken for the status quo to be changed. But believe what you want to.

The Sugar Coated Shaft “Take any survey of Pakistan and the top concern will be jobs and security. In fact, take the survey of any poor country and these will be at the top. Look at Maslow`s hierarchy.”

Did anyone take a survey before the 1965 war, or before Kargil? Anyone knows what the priority of Pakistani people was on 5 September 1965 or right before the Kargil clash? Did they want jobs or did they want war?

Where did Maslow’s hierarchy go when the general with cigar in his mouth & pistol in his hand ordered Kargil operation? A few months after nuclear explosions, Pakistani economy being in dire straits after sanctions having been slammed, and the generals send the sons of this country to go scale the heights of Kargil mountains? Some Maslow’s hierarchy of needs they were fulfilling I’d say. The only hierarchy of needs they were fulfilling was their own.

In those days the same people who are now arguing about economy being tops were crying at the top of their lungs that this post-nuclear-explosion scenario is the best time to start a Kargil like operation, as India will not go for an all out war fearing Pak’s nuclear capability. The economy really took the back seat at that time and Maslow’s hierarchy went flying out the window. Amazing how now the mantra has changed to “economy”.

It made much more sense to not go to a mini war in 1999, as Pakistan was left with virtually no friends after the nuclear explosion (compared to today when Pak has a MNNA status, for whatever it’s worth) and majority of loans & aid had been stopped (as opposed to now). But the generals had to do it. Who was thinking of Maslow at that time?

Whatever is happening in Pakistan now is not because all of a sudden the generals have seen the light of Maslow’s words. It is because now they are facing a power which they had never faced before. America’s daisy cutters now targeting cushy DHA Mansions and America’s LGBs now targeting the GHQ in Rawalpindi.

These same generals kept on fuelling the fires of hatred and violence in the country. They were OK with sectarian violence because some of the sectarian parties were providing fodder for Kashmir. They were OK with the rest of the country on fire, at the expense of Maslow`s hierarchy. Why? Because it was not they who were getting killed. It was not their kids who were being blown to pieces. It was not their riches or their lifestyle that were getting hit. It was just the common Pakistani, his kids & the Pakistani economy (an economy from which the generals are shielded courtesy their grip on power and the Bandar-bant of plots & resources that they do amongst themselves, free of any scrutiny & accountability).

Did the country’s image take a severe hit because of all this? It sure did. Did our economy get affected due to the political instability, the extremism, the sectarian and ethnic violence? It sure did. Were the potential investors scared all this time whenever they heard of heavy firing across LOC? They sure were. Did the generals ever care about the image, the economy, the lives of common Pakistanis in those days? Nope, they didn’t give two hoots. They have only started to care after 9-11. Why? Because American Daisy-cutters & LGBs can make a difference to these generals` lives in a way like nothing ever has in the past. The day the American gun withdraws from the generals’ face, is the day we’ll be back to square one, and all of a sudden Maslow and his golden words will just not make any sense anymore to our educated, economy-friendly generals.

Nothing in Pakistan is irreversible, especially as long as generals have the last say in matters. That is why 10 years of 6-8% growth does not amount to a sack of peas. Why? Because all of that growth can be washed away in a jiffy. How? All it will take is the American pressure being released, and our generals will forget all they would have learnt about Maslow’s hierarchy in those 10 years. Then, in a flash, they will remember that the best interest of Pakistan lies in some theory of strategic depth, or in perennial confrontation with India, or in scaling some mountains in Kargil and not in some stupid theory propounded by a guy with a weird sounding name like Maslow.

Anyone remember 1965? Anyone have a good reason why the 1965 war should have taken place in the first place? What was the economic condition of Pakistan pre and post 1965?


“Doesn`t matter who is running the country. Doesn`t matter what it is doing anywhere else. Not even the individual running the country, be it Musharraf, Benazir, etc. matters.”

In Pakistan it really does matter who is running the country, even if that someone has shown 6-8% growth for a couple of years. Why? Because generals running the country means that a major screw up will happen even if there’s a period of relative economic stability for a few years. Because Ayub, after a few years of economic growth led Pakistan to war. Because Musharraf led Pakistan to a mini war right after nuclear explosions. Because Zia powered the Pakistani economy with CIA money & heroin dollars and the house collapsed after the soviets left Afghanistan.

It matters because if Army keeps all the power, it will screw up again and again, the way it has screwed up all along these 57+ years.

To think that a few years of economic growth (or 10 years for that matter) means that it will keep on being on the right track is a fallacy as proven by our history. It will take one crazy general (or the existing general - if American policy changes), for the wheel to turn back. The economy needs to be in the hands of people whose interest is in keeping peace & quiet and in furthering and ``sustaining`` the business interests of the country (politicians like Shahbaz or Imran Khan), not in the hands of generals who one day smoke cigars and show off pistiols during Kargil & the next day become the successors of J.K Galbraith.

The generals will have no interest in keeping the economy on the correct path, in the long run. Why? Because their life style does not change no matter how the Pakistani economy is doing. They are not affected a single bit. They can go back to their jihads & wars, without changing their living standard & without having to stop their kids from going to Stanford or Yale. They have been doing that for the last 57 years without any accountability, and they can go back to their same old ways before you can say “economy”.

“put them in positions of power, and create an environment where they can operate without hinderances........

That`s it. That, in a nutshell is how a country progresses”

This simple nutshell has been there all along but our generals only realized it after 9-11. This nut shell will again be crushed if and when the American pressure is ever let off.


“.......If Musharraf (or anyone else) can even deliver five years of such growth, while the elitist will hate him, his picture will be on the back of every other rickshaw in Pakistan.........”

Musharraf better not talk to any rickshaw driver in Pakistan nowadays. If he does, he needs to make sure the rickshaw driver is not near a pana or any other sharp metallic object.

And here`s a little something from Mir Jamil Ur Rahman`s column in today`s (June 11) The News Online edition. Who`s Maslow`s hierarchy of needs is being satisfied in this budget? Do your own math.

``The pathetic condition of human resource development can be assessed from the fact that education has been allocated a paltry sum of Rs16 billion and health Rs9.4 billion. The total allocation of these two important sectors comes to Rs25.4 billion, which is Rs4.6 billion less than the increase that the defence budget would receive this year. The defence allocation has been increased to Rs223 billion from last year`s Rs193 billion, a hefty jump of Rs30 billion.``

Uproar over a Cartoon? I don`t think there would have been even a single voice of protest had Washington Post labelled the dog as ``Musharraf`` or ``Pak Army Generals`` or just simply ``Pak Army``. There would have been no protests whatsoever just as there weren`t any when Musharraf almost got blown to the sky or when Gen. Ahsan Saleem Hayat narrowly escaped a meeting with Gen. Zia. And as some interactors have suggested that is what is really going on anyway i.e. Army/Generals/Musharraf doing the bidding of the U.S like a faithful dog. So the question is, why all the uproar.

See the thing is, with the dog labelled Pakistan, it somehow implies that the people of Pakistan have some say in (or have some power over) what Musharraf & the Army are doing and whatever is going on actually has the backing of the common Pakistani.

Pakistanis just want the world to know that majority of Pakistanis never agreed to act like America`s dogs. Only Musharraf and his ghairt-mand corps commanders agreed to a role like that. So the solution: the dog be re-labelled properly and that will be the end of all protests.

Fighting Poverty in Pakistan Re#23 by Ghazalmir11

``The Pakistani leadership is in a position to take some bold steps right now, it has done so on many levels already so why not now abolish a meance like feudalism?``

And who`s gonna give fraudulent legitimacy to military regimes if feudalism is abolished? Who`s gonna fill the ballot boxes with jaali votes and give 97 % results in favor of our warrior generals if that happens? Do you think Shaukat Aziz could have been chosen Pakistan`s PM if the assemblies were not full of feudals & lotas?

In earlier days, these feudals worked as pawns of the British colonialists. They would subjugate local population to reap rewards & benefits from the British. Brits needed these feudals as they were the Crown`s link with the local populace and helped keep ``peace & calm`` in the lands of the Raj. In turn the feudals were gifted with land.

Now the roles have changed slightly. Instead of British colonialists, it is the Fauji colonialists who have taken over. Everything else is almost the same. Feudals do the army`s bidding, and keep their perks, Pajeros & their MNA seats. Army in return, can claim a facade of legitimacy. Why would an Army want to do away with such a sure fire way of claiming legitimacy? It is a perfect formula for success and the generals are not gonna shoot themselves in the foot by abolishing feudalism.

Dereliction of Duty Re: Various posts:

``If so that`s not true...consider Yahya Khan was overthrown by outraged junior officers``

There have been a few honorable men within the uniformed lot who resigned or opposed their commanders on matters of principle (and hats off to them), but even they could not cause the slightest change in the nefarious designs of their commanders. For every 1 principled officer there are 1000 more who are willing to say yes to every pathetic word coming out of their commander`s mouth. Otherwise there couldnt`ve been bombs falling on Pakistanis in tribal areas & Baluchistan, and murderous military actions wouldn`t have taken place against the Bengalis in 1971 .

Patriotic officers who really want to ``take care`` of their commander do what Hitler`s officers did on July 20th, 1944.

http://www.answers.com/topic/july-20-plot#Wikipedia

Junior officers making a commotion after the 1971 debacle was an emotional reaction after having lost ``half the country``. And in those days army was still not as entrenched in business ventures as it is today, so there was still some shame and sense of duty left. Nothing of the sort that happened in 1971 can be expected to happen now. Today everyone from the junior to senior officers is looking for minting money, as can be expected after army`s constant meddling in country`s affairs for another 3 decades even after 1971.

``lets not forget the whole general Ziauddin episode in 1999 when Nawaz was trying to impose his own person onto the Army some generals did back him against Mushy.. ``

They did? Well all of them were supposed to back Zia Ud Din, not a few. In any case I`m not sure that any of them backed Zia Ud Din. Had that been the case, Musharraf would have fired those corps commanders right after the coup. Nothing of that sort happened. Musharraf only changed corps commanders in a radical fashion for the first time after 9-11 at America`s behest. In any case, as I mentioned earlier, a few dissentions here and there have never made any dent in the COAS`s intentions to screw the country and all of them- Ayub, Zia & Musharraf- have successfully raped Pakistan, a few resignations here and there not withstanding.

``Do keep in mind that people who can volunteer to risk their lives for their country, have a lot of character and patriotism (far more than the rest of us Pakistanis).``

All armies in the world are willing to risk thier lives and die for their country. And no army asks for its pound of flesh like Pak army does. Besides, majority of ordinary Pakistanis are willing to risk their lives for the country. Thousands of people who volunteered to fight and gave their lives during the Afghan war and during the Kashmir ops. were civilians, not faujis. The willingness to die for certain causes is not the forte of Pak army alone. And if the army feels that`s too much, then there are millions of ordinary Pakistanis willing to take on the roll and sacrifice their lives, like they did in Afghanistan & Kashmir, while army generals & their children sat comfy in thier DHA mansions.

I suspect that in any future confrontation with an enemy, this pampered army of ours -especially with an incompetent, low IQ, and morally bankrupt top command of ours- is going to do exactly with Saddam`s forces did i.e. take to their heels and vanish in thin air, never to be seen again. The only resistance that will come will be from the ordinary Pakistanis.

``Recently, Musharraf fired the whole top command of the PAF, because they had refused to participate in Kargil, when he was COAS. The PAF saying that it was a bad idea (which it was).``

Yes, and that is the whole problem. The inaction of military brass when the COAS screws an institution or the country is just plain pathetic. Musharraf can fire another 5 top PAF officers tomorrow without any reason, and there`ll be no squeak. Then the day after tomorrow, he can fire 5 of the current corps commanders and install even more incompetent generals in their place, and there`ll be no squeak. He can keep hiring, firing, overthrowing, installing whoever he wants to and there`ll be but minor protest from within the army, and that`s one of the points of Nighat`s article. Inaction by the army commanders even when their COAS is acting like a maniac.

``The problem with the Pakistani military is within one specific group. The Army Generals.``

The problem is with the whole of the army where even the junior officers don`t want to rock the boat in fear of losing the perks that they can obtain once they attain somewhat senior positions.

Urstruly.... that`s a good article that you have posted. Do keep posting more. I don`t agree with some of the views that you post on Chowk, but I certainly do agree with most of your insights about our brave soldiers. I wonder where all the ``ghairat-mand`` faujis have gone now? Hundreds of Pakistanis are missing, in jails without a proof, being tortured, on the behest of U.S by their COAS, and they are keeping mum? What oath did they take when they joined the army? To protect the people of Pakistan or to protect their evil chiefs in whatever they do?

Sui Incident: A PR Disaster ``Actually, what really perturbs me is my deep-held belief that Mr. Musharraf as an individual is a benevolent and compassionate guy.``

Actually.. I remember exactly the same thing being said about Zia.. that he was personally a very humble, down-to-earth, honest kinda` guy.. and paanch waqt ka nimazi also, mind you. He would serve you curry & rice himself if you ever had lunch with him.

The thing is all these personal qualities don`t matter much without any proper system of accountability, checks & balances..and also doen`t say anything about the competence of a person to administer and rule a country. Zia managed to royally screw the country even with his humbleness & down-to-earthness.. and Musharraf is doing the same.. even with his benevolence & compassion.

``He did take proper and personal notice of the gory incident in Meerwala. This time around, his indifference, his silence is perplexing.``

Yeah.... and the answer to his ``perplexing`` behaviour is preyty obvious. And that is what you have already stated: PR.

Meerwala case did not involve any army personnel.. just local feudals & goondas. Hey, nice opportunity for Musharraf to jump in and look like an enlightened & moderated ruler. So he jumps right in, has the ``accused`` guys arrested, and his government wins accolades from NGOs & western governments. A lot of pats on the back for a job well done.

Fast foward the time about a year or so, an ``army`` captain gets ``accused`` (note that Meerwala guys were also ``accused``, but were put in jail straight away). But is the captain arrested? Noooo.. he comes on TV for interviews.. pleads that he has nothing to do with the incident. And Musharraf himself says that he`s seen the investigation results and he`s sure the captain `aint guilty.

The only & obvious difference between the two cases is the involvement of army personnel in the second case.

What if a civilian (let`s say maybe an engineer-or a technician- working at Sui`s plant) had been accused of rape? Would he have been given the same royal treatment by the generals like the captain has been given? Would he have been able to get his voice all across Pakistan by getting interviewed by GEO? Would Musharraf have ever said that he`s seen the investigation results and the engineer/technician is not guilty? You can bet that would never have happened.

I believe that what the army thinks is proving a captain guilty would be bad PR in the current environment of the country (because of the already depleted respect that they have left with the people of Pakistan) so they try to hush up the matter as much as possible. But arresting the accused in Meerwala case is good PR, so they went ahead and did that.

I can bet if the accused in Meerwala had been a few captains & lieutenants, this same enlightened General and his ISPR machinery would have done everything in their power to malign the victim and protect their wardi-walas.

Sui Incident: A PR Disaster You say:

``The ability of individual officers to act with near impunity as regularly reported by the print media is frightening. Here they are, army officers to demonstrate and impress the civilians with professional integrity and they are among them who ought to be investigated and locked up.``

Exactly. In Pakistan all that matters is who carries the bigger gun. So, when Pakistan Army`s Corps Commanders feel like taking over the country. they go ahead. No law, no regulation, no constitution, not even their own oath has ever held the treacherous lot back. Why then should not a piddly Major General also follow suit and have a cop beaten up and chained because he dared ask tinted paper to be removed from the general`s car. And why shouldn`t the junior officers also follow suit? Why should they not beat up a cop who dares ask them to produce a valid driving license or tries to give them a ticket for violating the red light? And why shouldn`t the Baluch tribes also follow suit? Why shouldn`t they attack convoys, kill FC men and lodge rockets into Sui installations, if they can? What moral right do the Generals have to ask Bugti, or the NWFP tribals to obey the so called law? Which law? Which law did Pak Army ever adhere to? Or what law does Pakistan Army adhere to? What law should the rest of Pakistanis adhere to? Why should anyone else obey any law when the army doesn`t?

In Pakistan you can go ahead and do whatever well mighty pleases you if you can get away with it. And you can get away with anything as long as you have the guns on your side. That is the only law that holds true in Pakistan. And if the military can make use of it, why not the bugtis, why not the NWFP tribals, and why not anyone else who can?

You say:

``Can we blindly trust the narration of Mr. Akbar Bugti? We shouldn’t.``

I agree with you.. We shouldn`t...

But there is one group of people who should not have any qualms in readily accepting Bugti`s accusations... Musharraf supporters.

If Musharraf supporters can keep on believing a compulsive liar who has gone back on almost everything that he promised in the last 5 years - and that also promised on live prime time TV- then what`s wrong with believing Bugti`s assertions? At least this group should have nooooooooo problems whatsoever in accepting Bugti`s word. They`ve been happily accepting every lie from a much more treacherous and compulsive liar. Bugti`s an angel in front of Musharraf and his Goebblesique ISPR.

Sui Incident: A PR Disaster Nice article Riffat... Few comments from my side.

You said:

``If memory serves me right, it was in early 90s, a group of junior army officers stationed at Risalpur manhandled a local bus conductor and driver in Nowshera. Within a couple of days, the then army chief, General Asif Nawaz was out in the media personally apologizing to the public and the victims for the misbehaviour of army officers and promising the sternest possible punishment to the culprits. Later on, General Asif Nawaz was equally swift and steadfast when a Major murdered Sindhi peasants.``

That was the time when army had not taken the 100 or so U-Turns that it has since Musharraf Messiah came in. Neither had General Asif given away air-bases to Americans, unconditionally, with no questions asked. Neither had the nuclear scientist AQ Khan been humiliated the way has has been under this enlightened regime. Neither did General Asif hold a fake referendum to declare himself the all in all. Simply put, army had been away from the political scene for a while and they still held respect of the people. They knew they will be praised-not critiqued- if they take their own people to the task.

Not anymore. The good will balance of the army within the people of Pakistan has shrunk to its lowest level (since probably the defeat of 1971). You just need to compare the attitude of people towards the army and how drastically it has changed in the last 5 years.

I believe what this current regime thinks is that it cannot take the chance of even having a proper investigation done for the rape - even if the said Captain is innocent - because they think they just cannot afford more bad PR. They are probably thinking.. hey what if after the investigation the captain really comes out to be guilty... what then? we (army) can`t afford another humiliation. One constable Nazir Dogar was enough.

That`s why from day one the emphasis has been on wanting to hush up the case. Army just doen`t want another public humiliation, and it will do anything to stop that from happening. Although, in the process it has probably accumulated even more humiliation than it would have if it had handled the matter properly!

Cover-Up of a Gang Rape by the Military? Re# 17

``There is only action that the Army, traditionally, protects its junior officers in, in relation to non-military organizations. And that is when junior officers go and beat up policewallahs. This tends to happen, now and then, because Army Captains and police officers, and specially sepoys, tend to go at it, once in a while. And, as per tradition, everyone from the Colonel to the General, supports his soldiers in such fights.......Interestingly most civilians in the jurisdiction of the police thana, also support the soldiers...........``

This so called support of the awam for the soldiers for beating the police wallas has changed dramatically and was evident when the beating of constable Nazir Dogar occurred. So much was the army critisied that our own mighty enlightened General had to say that he had himself did the investigation and had found the Maj. General involved in the incident to be innocent. If there is any doubt on this, let the army try to beat-up a policeman again, and then see what the reaction of the common man is.

By the way, even when the beating of police wallas by some Army lieutenants happend in Lahore a few years back, the incident was not looked upon favorably by the common man.

I guess people will take beating from an army that at least defeats its foes in the battle field. Who wants to love an army that gets a thrashing when it really matters and then comes back and slaps the civilians!

Cover-Up of a Gang Rape by the Military? There were some comments earlier about the need for the Army to cover-up the case. The question is if Maj. Arshad Jamil could be hanged for killing 9 Sindhi peasants in 1992, then why would the Army try to cover a gang rape by a Captain in 2005?

Well, a lot of water has flown under the bridge since 1992.

A major difference between the time when Maj. Arshad Jamil committed the crime and today is that in 1992 the Army had been in the background for a few years and its image had not taken the type of battering that it has taken since 1999. The Army can potentially try to hide an act like rape perpetrated by its Captain (an individual act) in 2005 because the whole institution`s already weakened image can suffer even more due to the individual act of one of its wardi-wallas. This image has already taken quite a strong hit in the past few years, and the Generals don`t want it to suffer anymore.

Gone are the days of ``Fauj aur awam aik``. If anyone has any doubts, try talking to common folks, taxi drivers, shopkeepers in Pakistan today, and see how their views have changed in the past few years.

In 1992, when Maj. Arshad Jamil was proven guilty, people said: See, how good & honest our army is- in dispensing justice- even if it involves its own people.

In 2005, if the accused Captain is proven guilty of rape, people will say: See, this army lives off our blood, our sweat, and now these bullies have started raping the country`s women, our daughters, and our sisters.

That is the difference between 1992 & 2005. And the generals know that very well. That`s why all the hush hush.