# Musharraf VS Imran Khan: Who is best at handling foreign policy ?



## Kompromat

I am post two videos basically interviews of Musharraf and Imran by international media CNN & BBC respectively.

Both were thrown at the same question - its up to you to decide who has handled it better.

*Musharraf's Interview with CNN*












*Imran Khan*


BBC News - Imran Khan criticises US aid for Pakistan








*Waiting your comments*


----------



## Masterchief

Imran khan could be the cleanest politician i have seen, he is a man who follows his own heart.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## z9-ec

Without doubt, Musharraf is the best diplomatic entity Pakistan has and needs to ensure it's survival. 

His stature in the international community in itself vindicates of how well he performed during his tenure.

I have statistics to prove it. Pakistan needs friends not enemies. Trade not aid as honorable Gen. (r) Musharraf put it. 

No debate. What Imran Khan is preaching equates to surrender to the T and AQ in turn for peace. Not only will the world condemn us, we will, in effect be isolated.



Masterchief said:


> Imran khan could be the cleanest politician i have seen, he is a man who follows his own heart.


 
His foreign policy is based on impractical standards. He's oblivious to ground realities. 

Even his own party members do not know how he plans to deal with the cancerous radicals and extremism.
.

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## laiqs@mi

and what has mushi done . . . . 
its not about personal Atack about Imran Khan or mush. . . .
I personaly am against this democracy ... i dont like politicians at all. but mush has done great damage to pakistan ....... 
as for I.K until now he is talking sence. very good. plus what he has shown is his juniors waseem moen and all other call him skipper because he has the quality to lead. and few people asking about his past... i think past doesnot count that much present counts. 
and the time will tell I.K has done.


----------



## Saifullah Sani

Musharraf and imran Khan and the gift of puppy


----------



## z9-ec

laiqs@mi said:


> i dont like politicians at all. but mush has done great damage to pakistan .......



And what damage would that be? 

Unless you consider, the following as damage: improving our image in the world, confronting the radicals, human rights for tribals, women rights, bidding farewell to the IMF, record foreign investment and GDP growth.

Building sustainable diplomatic ties with the likes of Brazil to Russia.

Let their be no doubt Pakistan needs to confront extremists. It's now or never.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## S.M.R

I will go for Musharraf, following are his achievements:

- he successfully kicked the Nawaz out from Pakistan.
- when he joined the tax collection was around 300 Bn which rose over 1000 Bn.
-per capita income which was around 500$, which doubled till 2007.
- created over 10 million job opportunities in different sectors.
- the business sector has always supported him.
- he allowed print media to air their news channels, which the previous govts. never allowed, (even Jang was forced to be printed on 1 paper during Nawaz Sharif era)
-Hamid Mir and company got enabled drawing salaries in millions.
-debt servicing was above 60% of total revenues which lowered to around 24%.
-His contribution towards HEC is not hidden.
-Not a single financial scam against him so far, despite he remained in power for a long period of time.
- He is not a dual face personality (like everybody in our politicians drink but he never tried to hide his drinking habit.).

Even the list is long enough.

However, 1 super dooooper thing which I like most, as HE was the only one who has the courage to face indian intellectuals / media alone.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## S.M.R

Masterchief said:


> Imran khan could be the cleanest politician i have seen, he is a man who follows his own heart.


 
There are no doubts about Imran Khan, in no way I am against him, I like him, even Love him. but he is not the suitable person to lead the country. He is bit aggressive.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## American Pakistani

I like both polititions & it will be a good equation if one will become President & other PrimeMinister, but if we have to choose one i will choose Musharraf because i saw his era was best developing era in both fields economically & militarily. Also he is intelligent & know how to deal with anyone.

Also i don't like I.K's stance on TTP terrorists, he says Pakistan should deal with them by talks. In my opinion these TTP,BLA terrorist should & must be crushed brutually with strong deadly force. In 2008 or early 09 Pakistan had a peace deal with TTP terrorists & gave them Swat,SWA & NWA to impose their law's but we all saw that these mf's break it & spread in many other districts of KP near Islamabad, & they killed civilions brutually in the name of religion, so I.K should change his stance cuz these animals can't live peacefully.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## millfieldpakis

imran is the better option you see a man sitting having tea with common people sleeping on the floor i mean its impressive


----------



## AstanoshKhan

Musharraf was capable and had a very good chance of becoming a very good leader to lead Pakistan towards prosperity but to save his chair he became a criminal in that thirst for power and shook hands with crooks sitting in the parliament today. He too had a very good chance of getting rid off Zardari and Nawaz but he let go and eventually paid a huge price for it by loosing his position and as a result of these mistakes he put the whole nation in danger.

Musharraf is history, the only sane thing would be to start support Imran Khan.


----------



## aks18

innocentboy said:


> I will go for Musharraf, following are his achievements:
> 
> - he successfully kicked the Nawaz out from Pakistan.
> - when he joined the tax collection was around 300 Bn which rose over 1000 Bn.
> -per capita income which was around 500$, which doubled till 2007.
> - created over 10 million job opportunities in different sectors.
> - the business sector has always supported him.
> - he allowed print media to air their news channels, which the previous govts. never allowed, (even Jang was forced to be printed on 1 paper during Nawaz Sharif era)
> -Hamid Mir and company got enabled drawing salaries in millions.
> -debt servicing was above 60% of total revenues which lowered to around 24%.
> -His contribution towards HEC is not hidden.
> -Not a single financial scam against him so far, despite he remained in power for a long period of time.
> - He is not a dual face personality (like everybody in our politicians drink but he never tried to hide his drinking habit.).
> 
> Even the list is long enough.
> 
> However, 1 super dooooper thing which I like most, as HE was the only one who has the courage to face indian intellectuals / media alone.


 


he ruled pakistan 9 years its hell of time to make development and improvement any government ruling 9 years can achieve all this what you have mentioned .


----------



## JonAsad

I am all up for Imran Khan- but i will want him to compromise on some of the stands-- Be a little flexible-

All of you read my avatar pix and Aho

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Mush f..ked up by killing Bugti n messin with chief justic.

IM has gutts.

Il chose IK for PM.
AND
Mush for president.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## jayron

I think Mushraff is a more honest guy with intent to deal with the real issues of Pakistan. Though politics has shown his not so pretty side, he is still the best chance for Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## desioptimist

Sadly musharaf who is a military guy, is more mature than Imran Khan.
Imran Khan is passionate, clean and nice guy, but he will finish last. He is also telling everything to everybody, trying to widen his popularity too much.
In the end he needs to take a stand on terrorism.
The world is full of such nice and well meaning guy who make a mess of everything.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Omar1984

Musharraf is the reason why Pakistan is in this mess in the first place. What was wrong in staying neutral? Why drag Pakistan into this never ending war OF terror which is destroying Pakistan. 

Iran stayed out of this war OF terror, and it also has a long border with Afghanistan and has sea ports. Now look at Iran today and look at Pakistan.

Imran Khan is the only politician who cares for Pakistan and not his bank balance.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## farhan_9909

if i has to chooese between them

i willl go for musharaf any time

imran khan without any doubt will be a good leader

bt musharaf is more mature and know how to deal with the current situation

and i am sure if he has given one chance again
he will be very honest to pakistan.


Imran khan is a hope for pakistan bt musharaf is the best and ultimate choice in this presentt situation for pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## laiqs@mi

who created ahtisab beauro ?? 
and the culprits were in his party after they were balckmail by ahtisab beauro . 
all the curropt people were with him . . . .
none other than mush. 
he has done good things i agree . but his negative points are very big one. 
and baki sara lafzon ka khail hai . . . 
sharabi log . . . Rashi log ... kabhi bhe koi theek kam nahi karney daingey. jo bhe ho

---------- Post added at 10:17 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:16 AM ----------

and one big reason for supporting Imran for me is Indians dont like him.


----------



## EagleEyes

Imran Khan is a born leader, he will learn and lead Pakistan to greatness.

Probably not going to happen though, Zardari/Nawaz are billionaires and have the pocket to win campaigns.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## moha199

Musharraf all the way! now don't take me wrong, i have nothing against ik actually i like him also but when it come to Pakistan i will put my senses over my emotions, There are many die heart supporters of Musharraf who has fallen for propaganda, for having WOT not being our war and that we had choice, i seriously laugh now because all i see is chicken out personalities because when heat turned up and Pakistan had to face heat in the final stages, many ran away like chickens, From 2001 to 2008 many most of the members on this page supported and accepted that Pakistan had no choice but to side with west, Indeed iran stayed neutral because it has something what world need and when Bush tried to move to attack iran in 2006 we saw GAS"patrol" $7 a gallon in USA. where as Pakistan has nothing to offer. We all know that we had no choice and i have tried to remind many that if you think that Pakistan had choice then lets lay out possibilities of how Pakistan could off stayed away from this war and possibly fought the world plus USA. but in return i get no answer! 
Musharraf has many votes. the problem is that Musharraf's supporters are not typical jiyallay who will try to prove their opponent wrong which is the culture of Pakistan where as Musharraf's supporters will also say that IK is also good and there should be some working together plan but IK jiyallay are typical voters who say that IK is only good no one else is, and if you are not PTI then you are traitor lol to me this is rational.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## blood

WebMaster said:


> Imran Khan is a born leader, he will learn and lead Pakistan to greatness.
> 
> Probably not going to happen though, Zardari/Nawaz are billionaires and have the pocket to win campaigns.


 
imran khan might have leadership qualitie's but does not have any expert knowledge on pakistani economy and pakistani military establishment's, while MUSSHARAF is a tough task master, with a lot of experience behind him, he enjoy's cordial relation's with army and know's the basic problem's in pakistan. Pakistan had seen some economic growth under his rule as well. And some of the argument's made by IMRAN KHAN are not practical, such as rejection of american economic aid, when the country is having no economic growth, you can't run a country on silly ego's and emotion's.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## laiqs@mi

thats why i hate democracy .
because kabhi bhe koi theek banda is curropt system main nahi aa sakta. 
previously 3 crore 50 thousend illegal or 2 number votes were caust. and dont know how much this time. and we may know about the blunder after 3 to 4 years passed. 
imran no doubt is a great leader but in this curropt system he has got only 5% chance to come to rule the country. but iFFFFFFFFF he comes to rule the country he will have to deliver. other wise .......


----------



## laiqs@mi

blood said:


> imra khan might have leadership qualitie's but has less knowledge about pakistani economy and pakitai military establishment's, while MUSSHARAF is a tough task master, with a lot of experience behind him, he enjoy's cordial relation's with army and know's the basic problem's in pakistan. Pakistan had seen some economic growth under his rule as well. And some of the argument's made by IMRAN KHAN are not practical, such as rejection of american economic aid, when the country is having no economic growth, you can't run a country on silly ego's and emotion's.


 
very childesh view . 
What zardari knows about economy ????
what Nawaz knows about Economy???? 
What mush knows about economy ????
they all know about there personal bank balance Swiss A/C formhouses london and Saudi properties. 
but for imran he has good people around and he listens to great economist very good people in defence and all other fields of life. if you are a leader you dont have to be all rounder you just need to know K kis ko kaisey chalana hai.


----------



## blood

laiqs@mi said:


> very childesh view .
> What zardari knows about economy ????
> what Nawaz knows about Economy????
> What mush knows about economy ????
> they all know about there personal bank balance Swiss A/C formhouses london and Saudi properties.
> but for imran he has good people around and he listens to great economist very good people in defence and all other fields of life. if you are a leader you dont have to be all rounder you just need to know K kis ko kaisey chalana hai.


 
let me tell you that pakistan is all about military establishment's, and you can't have a more experienced guy than mush who has sound knowledge about army, if you see the current situation pak civilian governement and pk army are seen as two end's of a stick, the stick being pakistan, so a lot of confusion,chaos and disturbance has arisen due to this differnce's between civilian gov and army, this confusion will vanish if mush come's to power. regarding pak economy , i have already said that pak economy grew in mush era , so he has already proved himself when it come's to economic growth, so if given a chance he can repeat it again. while zardari gov is a total failure , econoically as well as militarily.And mush with all his experience will ot commit those mistake's which he comitted in his previous term.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## moha199

bro have all the names but kindly don't bring Musharraf in this list! i knew well off of economy and he didn't steal jack sh!t from Pakistan... this is exactly what i say i hate typical jiyallay.... now please tele all the figures from GOP reports or for this you can also use google and look up the economy of Pakistan prior to Musharraf and during musharraf. 






laiqs@mi said:


> very childesh view .
> What zardari knows about economy ????
> what Nawaz knows about Economy????
> What mush knows about economy ????
> they all know about there personal bank balance Swiss A/C formhouses london and Saudi properties.
> but for imran he has good people around and he listens to great economist very good people in defence and all other fields of life. if you are a leader you dont have to be all rounder you just need to know K kis ko kaisey chalana hai.







Year	Gross Domestic Product	US Dollar Exchange	Inflation Index
(2000=100)	Per Capita Income
(as % of USA)
1960	20,058	4.76 Pakistani Rupees 3.37
1965	31,740	4.76 Pakistani Rupees 3.40
1970	51,355	4.76 Pakistani Rupees 3.26
1975	131,330	9.91 Pakistani Rupees 2.36
1978	283,460	9.97 Pakistani Rupees	21	2.83
1985	569,114	16.28 Pakistani Rupees	30	2.07
1990	1,029,093	21.41 Pakistani Rupees	41	1.92
1995	2,268,461	30.62 Pakistani Rupees	68	2.16
2000	3,826,111	51.64 Pakistani Rupees	100	1.54
2005	6,581,103	59.86 Pakistani Rupees	126	1.71
Indicator 1999 2007 2008 2009
GDP $ 75 billion	$ 160 billion	$ 170 billion	$ 185 billion
GDP Purchasing Power Parity (PPP)	$ 270 billion	$ 475.5 billion	$ 504 billion	$ 545.6 billion
GDP per Capita Income $ 450 $ 925	$1085	$1250
Revenue collection Rs. 305 billion	Rs. 708 billion	Rs. 990 billion	Rs. 1.05 trillion
Foreign reserves $ 1.96 billion	$ 16.4 billion	$ 8.89 billion	$ 14 billion
Exports $ 7.5 billion	$ 18.5 billion	$ 19.22 billion	$ 18.45 billion
Textile Exports $ 5.5 billion	$ 11.2 billion	-	-
KHI stock exchange (100-Index)$ 5 billion at 700 points	$ 75 billion at 14,000 points	$ 46 billion at 9,300 points	$ 26.5 billion at 9,000 points
Foreign Direct Investment $ 1 billion	$ 8.4 billion	$ 5.19 billion	$ 4.6 billion
External Debt & Liabilities $ 39 billion	$ 40.17 billion	$ 45.9 billion	$ 50.1 billion
Poverty level 34% 24%	-	-
Literacy rate 45% 53%	-	-
Development programs Rs. 80 billion	Rs. 520 billion	Rs. 549.7 billion	Rs. 621 billion


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Pakistan



Take some time and read this, http://www.adb.org/Documents/Assessments/Private-Sector/PAK/Private-Sector-Assessment.pdf

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## blood

moha199 said:


> bro have all the names but kindly don't bring Musharraf in this list! i knew well off of economy and he didn't steal jack sh!t from Pakistan... this is exactly what i say i hate typical jiyallay.... now please tele all the figures from GOP reports or for this you can also use google and look up the economy of Pakistan prior to Musharraf and during musharraf.


 
thakyou for the source , now they will know how much did mush knew about pak economy


----------



## cheekybird

Im all up for imran khan,he follows his heart,he's brave,not corrupt.He has been saying this for years that pakistan should go out on wot and time has proved him right,look where we are now because of jumping into wot,and except imran khan i dont see any other politition who can take pakistan out of this mess.And i would definately not want another army coup in my country so hope Imran khan does the job of a good leader.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hyde

blood said:


> thakyou for the source , now they will know how much did mush knew about pak economy


 
But what people do not want to understand is - the life does not stop at dollar, dollar and dollars

He was good in some matters (most related to economy) but extremely failed in other sensitive issues.

He ruled the country for about 10 years so the economy was bound to increase up to certain extents... during 90s all regimes were under sanctions comparing to Musharraf's regime which was rather backed by the foreign nations and were getting aid from all over the world. It was not because of Musharraf's ability but the whole world came to Pakistan for support in the War on Terror or in my opinion that was more like a mutual understanding by all parties.

Figures makes a lot difference but I always like to give the example from that movie that Spain conquered Brazil by force, won the land but ultimately all of its soldiers were killed... Portugal conquered Brazil and instead of force they absorbed the give away policy... put them under immense pressure of "Thankfulness" and then commanded them what to do... and now 99% of Brazil speaks Portuguese as their native language.

During Musharraf's era we were given money and $$$ but the country's sovereignty was also put on stake and this current regime is just following the same policies agreed by the Musharraf era and all we can do is - count $$$ and sell our people in exchange

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SivHp

Neighther of two....
these two are very lavish life enjoying people...
Pak desperately needs a new leader..should be down to earth; moderate


----------



## EagleEyes

> During Musharraf's era we were given money and $$$ but the country's sovereignty was also put on stake and this current regime is just following the same policies agreed by the Musharraf era and all we can do is - count $$$ and sell our mother in exchange



Except during Musharraf's rule economy was stable, black/blue/yellow water personnel weren't moving freely, attacks were mostly limited (even at the height of Taliban power).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hyde

WebMaster said:


> Except during Musharraf's rule economy was stable, black/blue/yellow water personnel weren't moving freely, attacks were mostly limited (even at the height of Taliban power).


Well when the Taliban were in power, there was no attack in Pakistan. I can't remember any

The attacks began taking place once the Americans entered and took complete control of Afghanistan and the Talibans started absorbing Gorilla war tactics...

The attacks increased and so did the Tablian's set up in Pakistan all under the era of Musharraf

Musharraf never had a soft policy for anybody... he always encouraged to take action and rather negotiate dialogue with anybody and when he was stepped down... the plant of antipathy had grown to become a tree. I hate Talibans perhaps more than you but at the same time It was all under the nose of Musharraf when they flourished and spread like a wildfire in Pakistan. He wasn't able to contain them anywhere and under this PPP government all they had to do is to continue the war on terror, fight with its people in Swat and try to pacify relationships with the people of Balochistan. All messed up during Musharraf's regime


----------



## moha199

like i said many times. and ill say it again. first of all Zak you are supposed to be senior member who understand all this and not to be given classes like 101 what happen and where did the aid go. We all know that where those 10 billion dollars went! only 1 billion or less was spent on economy so your argument that world gave backing to Musharraf is totally wrong. you may say that the policy during mushrraf time regarding economy was right, let me give you an example, do you remember what happen when there was an oil spill in oceans and US beaches were damaged but soon americans cleaned their mess and first thing was done that OBAMA went to beach and jumped in water with his daughter and also the youngest one, which gave the impression to the tourist that our beaches are clean and you must come back to USA and enjoy your vacations at american beaches. well this is what exactly Musharraf used to do! he promoted each sector himself by putting himself as a middle man and gained trust of world that it is safe to invest in Pakistan! now if your other leaders or no leaders failed to do what Musharraf did then why blame Mushrraf and praise world and aid money? WTF. now coming to your argument that people like so called educated class of pakistan is so stupid which falls for the propoganda of media and opposition and now they hate Musharraf! let me remind you that upto jan 20 2008 USA wanted to put 30 again ONLY 30 security agents on Pakistani soil and Musharraf threaten to USA that he will not let it happen but now when Musharraf is gone first night 469 visas were issued and we all know this from our media now and after Musharraf there were 10,000 visas were issued to Americans and blame is put on Musharraf but question is that did Musharraf allow anyone? upto 2008 i remember Musharraf was threatening USA that he will not allow those 30 trainers to Pakistan if another incident like this happen in Pakistan "remember when usa fired on pakistani soil and killed 11 FC personals and Pakistani forces shot back at nato forces and where Musharraf gave historic threat to bush's argument when bush said that he will put american troops in Pakistani soil and Musharraf said it right away in singapore visit that I DARE ANYONE TO ENTER OUR MOUNTAINS, YOU WILL REGRET THAT DAY!" does it ring a bell or you want me to post the link?


Zaki FX said:


> But what people do not want to understand is - the life does not stop at dollar, dollar and dollars
> 
> He was good in some matters (most related to economy) but extremely failed in other sensitive issues.
> 
> He ruled the country for about 10 years so the economy was bound to increase up to certain extents... during 90s all regimes were under sanctions comparing to Musharraf's regime which was rather backed by the foreign nations and were getting aid from all over the world. It was not because of Musharraf's ability but the whole world came to Pakistan for support in the War on Terror or in my opinion that was more like a mutual understanding by all parties.
> 
> Figures makes a lot difference but I always like to give the example from that movie that Spain conquered Brazil by force, won the land but ultimately all of its soldiers were killed... Portugal conquered Brazil and instead of force they absorbed the give away policy... put them under immense pressure of "Thankfulness" and then commanded them what to do... and now 99% of Brazil speaks Portuguese as their native language.
> 
> During Musharraf's era we were given money and $$$ but the country's sovereignty was also put on stake and this current regime is just following the same policies agreed by the Musharraf era and all we can do is - count $$$ and sell our people in exchange

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Rafael

Three reasons for what Musharaff would have been executed had this been any other sane country:

1- Bowing down to American pressure and getting involved in America's war.
2- Letting Taliban and AQ find safe heavens in FATA and NW after Tora Bora Operation.
3- Issuing NRO and letting every crook and thief come back to the country and contest elections which lead to this PPP govt.

Yeah he was a commando, an SSG.

My foot!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hyde

moha199 said:


> like i said many times. and ill say it again. first of all Zak you are supposed to be senior member who understand all this and not to be given classes like 101 what happen and where did the aid go. We all know that where those 10 billion dollars went! only 1 billion or less was spent on economy so your argument that world gave backing to Musharraf is totally wrong. you may say that the policy during mushrraf time regarding economy was right, let me give you an example, do you remember what happen when there was an oil spill in oceans and US beaches were damaged but soon americans cleaned their mess and first thing was done that OBAMA went to beach and jumped in water with his daughter and also the youngest one, which gave the impression to the tourist that our beaches are clean and you must come back to USA and enjoy your vacations at american beaches. well this is what exactly Musharraf used to do! he promoted each sector himself by putting himself as a middle man and gained trust of world that it is safe to invest in Pakistan! now if your other leaders or no leaders failed to do what Musharraf did then why blame Mushrraf and praise world and aid money? WTF. now coming to your argument that people like so called educated class of pakistan is so stupid which falls for the propoganda of media and opposition and now they hate Musharraf! let me remind you that upto jan 20 2008 USA wanted to put 30 again ONLY 30 security agents on Pakistani soil and Musharraf threaten to USA that he will not let it happen but now when Musharraf is gone first night 469 visas were issued and we all know this from our media now and after Musharraf there were 10,000 visas were issued to Americans and blame is put on Musharraf but question is that did Musharraf allow anyone? upto 2008 i remember Musharraf was threatening USA that he will not allow those 30 trainers to Pakistan if another incident like this happen in Pakistan "remember when usa fired on pakistani soil and killed 11 FC personals and Pakistani forces shot back at nato forces and where Musharraf gave historic threat to bush's argument when bush said that he will put american troops in Pakistani soil and Musharraf said it right away in singapore visit that I DARE ANYONE TO ENTER OUR MOUNTAINS, YOU WILL REGRET THAT DAY!" does it ring a bell or you want me to post the link?


 
well i have had enough arguments in past

See pressler amendment had forced our economy to low growth rate during 90s and there is no doubt both PPP and PML-N were only failures and are most corrupt parties in Pakistan but lets see everything in right angle.

When Musharraf came, almost all sanctions were lifted and the world itself was offering lucrative offers to Pakistan to seek their support in War on Terror. That was not a standalone policy by Pakistan but the entire world witnessed statements from foreign nations saying "USA awarded F-16s contract to Pakistan for their support in War on Terror" and other nations provided funds, investment and other stuff only for the sole sake.

Now I can remember there were only 1G mobile phones during 90s and the telecommunication industry was very limited but since past 10 years this industry expanded multiple times and increasing like 50% each year. There was also very small industry for IT, Electronic Media and various electronic devices introduced in past 10 years. These industries increased by multiple times resulting in billions of dollars worth of investment all over the world by the top entities of each respective company and directly reflecting towards the growth rate of each nation. This growth rate was not only limited to Pakistan but the entire world witnessed similar growth rate (especially the poor states thanks to their cheap labour).

I am not taking any credit away from Musharraf but still these growth rate and figures do not reflect the complete image of Pakistan. See a poor man in Pakistan whose basic earning was probably 1000 rupees 10 years ago was able to buy more food for himself than what he is buying with 5000 rupees in today's era. There has been higher inflation than the growth rate or rise in salaries. The life-style of poor man has further been hampered instead of comfort you may have been thinking about. See I could eat my whole school lunch back in 90s with only 5 rupees or buy good quality of clothes with less than 500 rupees but nowadays you won't get a quality cloth for less than 8000 rupees on any good shopping centre. So if the salary of a poor man increased and so did the inflation?

Most of the growth what Musharraf era shows was largely benefited to the richer people of Pakistan and middle class up to certain extent. Now if you say Musharraf gave a blunt statement against American invasion in Pakistan then I would have to take it as a mere statement because he was the one who allowed drone attacks in the country and he was the one who allowed Blackwater and intelligence agencies in Pakistan. If you don't believe just type on youtube and you will find videos dating back to 2007 when blackwater and other intelligence agencies was roaming freely in Pakistan.

Yes he did brought $$$ in the country but at the same time he also brought drone attacks, blackwater, intelligence agencies, suicide bombers and extremism in the country. What about those people that he sold to America and were later released by the Americans finding them innocents and torchering them for an year or more than that? Who is responsible for anger of Baloch brothers? Who is responsible for NRO topi-drama that has put puppets and clowns in command who should have rather be living behind the bars.... it can be very long

PS: I am senior member does not mean i must follow anyone's opinion... I am a Pakistani and reserve my right to give my opinion. I like Musharraf for various economic policies but at the same time I hate him for having a very weak foreign policy that us forced us to be felt like a criminal state before the world.


----------



## S.M.R

millfieldpakis said:


> imran is the better option you see a man sitting having tea with common people sleeping on the floor i mean its impressive


 
If that is the criteria then what about Marvi Memon

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## z9-ec

Zaki FX said:


> well i have had enough arguments in past
> 
> See pressler amendment had forced our economy to low growth rate during 90s and there is no doubt both PPP and PML-N were only failures and are most corrupt parties in Pakistan but lets see everything in right angle.
> 
> When Musharraf came, almost all sanctions were lifted and the world itself was offering lucrative offers to Pakistan to seek their support in War on Terror. That was not a standalone policy by Pakistan but the entire world witnessed statements from foreign nations saying "USA awarded F-16s contract to Pakistan for their support in War on Terror" and other nations provided funds, investment and other stuff only for the sole sake.



Good lord, PRESLER AMENDENT was *NOT* I repeat *NOT* part of economic sanctions! there never were any economic sanctions. Have you ever read the amendment? it was purely military related.

BTW, IF Imran Khan comes into power expect the same reaction from the US. They will not give you spares for F-16s, cobras, bells, UH-1s and etc.

Economic sanctions came into existence post 1998 after the test.



> Now I can remember there were only 1G mobile phones during 90s and the telecommunication industry was very limited but since past 10 years this industry expanded multiple times and increasing like 50% each year. There was also very small industry for IT, Electronic Media and various electronic devices introduced in past 10 years. These industries increased by multiple times resulting in billions of dollars worth of investment all over the world by the top entities of each respective company and directly reflecting towards the growth rate of each nation. This growth rate was not only limited to Pakistan but the entire world witnessed similar growth rate (especially the poor states thanks to their cheap labour).



Investor friendly environment was the result of this exponential growth. 



> I am not taking any credit away from Musharraf but still these growth rate and figures do not reflect the complete image of Pakistan. See a poor man in Pakistan whose basic earning was probably 1000 rupees 10 years ago was able to buy more food for himself than what he is buying with 5000 rupees in today's era. There has been higher inflation than the growth rate or rise in salaries. The life-style of poor man has further been hampered instead of comfort you may have been thinking about. See I could eat my whole school lunch back in 90s with only 5 rupees or buy good quality of clothes with less than 500 rupees but nowadays you won't get a quality cloth for less than 8000 rupees on any good shopping centre. So if the salary of a poor man increased and so did the inflation?



And the world is wrong to accept GDP growth as an indication of improvement in economic state of a country? come on.




> Most of the growth what Musharraf era shows was largely benefited to the richer people of Pakistan and middle class up to certain extent. Now if you say Musharraf gave a blunt statement against American invasion in Pakistan then I would have to take it as a mere statement because he was the one who allowed drone attacks in the country and he was the one who allowed Blackwater and intelligence agencies in Pakistan. If you don't believe just type on youtube and you will find videos dating back to 2007 when blackwater and other intelligence agencies was roaming freely in Pakistan.



Even the illiterate agree the rapid expansion of the middle class in Pakistan



> Yes he did brought $$$ in the country but at the same time he also brought drone attacks, blackwater, intelligence agencies, suicide bombers and extremism in the country. What about those people that he sold to America and were later released by the Americans finding them innocents and torchering them for an year or more than that? Who is responsible for anger of Baloch brothers? Who is responsible for NRO topi-drama that has put puppets and clowns in command who should have rather be living behind the bars.... it can be very long
> 
> PS: I am senior member does not mean i must follow anyone's opinion... I am a Pakistani and reserve my right to give my opinion. I like Musharraf for various economic policies but at the same time I hate him for having a very weak foreign policy that us forced us to be felt like a criminal state before the world.


 
NRO was his mistake, he repeatedly accepted it. Nonetheless, NRO did *NOT* ELECT PPP and PML-N. They were elected by the people of Pakistan.

Dollars did not come in as bakhsheesh/aid. They were in terms of foreign investment and various other economic program which Moha has already mentioned.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## z9-ec

raheel1 said:


> Three reasons for what Musharaff would have been executed had this been any other sane country:
> 
> 1- Bowing down to American pressure and getting involved in America's war.



I'm eagerly waiting for people to see if he comes into power what he will do.

It's easier to say things that please the masses but once you're President of Pakistan and told about the ground realities. Things change. He himself mentioned a few days ago on national TV that if Pakistan pulls out of WoT Pakistan will suffer loss in terms of KHARABS of ruppees.

Pakistan needs friends not enemies as I mentioned earlier. Having the worlds only super power as your enemy would be disastrous.





> 2- Letting Taliban and AQ find safe heavens in FATA and NW after Tora Bora Operation.



He was the first army general to confront extremists and recognize the threat they are to Pakistan. Had he not joined WoT, the consequences were severe to say the least. I think Abottabad raid vindicates it

---------- Post added at 07:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:21 AM ----------




WebMaster said:


> Imran Khan is a born leader, he will learn and lead Pakistan to greatness.
> 
> Probably not going to happen though, Zardari/Nawaz are billionaires and have the pocket to win campaigns.



If he is what you say he is, please explain to me how he plans to confront and eliminate the threat of radicals and extremists?

A born leader makes bold decisions based on national interests and not to appease the masses.




Omar1984 said:


> Musharraf is the reason why Pakistan is in this mess in the first place. What was wrong in staying neutral? Why drag Pakistan into this never ending war OF terror which is destroying Pakistan.
> 
> Iran stayed out of this war OF terror, and it also has a long border with Afghanistan and has sea ports. Now look at Iran today and look at Pakistan.
> 
> Imran Khan is the only politician who cares for Pakistan and not his bank balance.


 
Staying neatral? is that a joke?

Don't you remember what happened in Abottabad few days ago? or are you in a state of oblivion.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## S.M.R



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## S.M.R

Comparison of economy from Independent Sources:

Pak Economy in 1999 was: $ 75 billion (Source)
Pak Economy in 2007 is: $ 160 billion (Source) and (Source)
Pak Economy in 2008 is: $ 170 billion (Source) and (Source)

GDP Growth in 1999: 3.1 % (Source)
GDP Growth in 2005: 8.4 % (Source)
GDP Growth in 2007: 7 % (Source) and (Source)
GDP Growth in 2009: 2 % (Source) and (Source)

GDP Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) in 1999: $ 270 billion (Source)
GDP Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) in 2007: $ 475.5 billion (Source)
GDP Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) in 2008: $ 504.3 billion (Source)

GDP per Capita Income in 1999: $ 450 (Source)
GDP per Capita Income in 2007: $ 921 (Source)
GDP per Capita Income in 2008: $1042 (Source)

Pak revenue collection 1999: Rs. 305 billion (Source)
Pak revenue collection 2007: Rs. 708 billion (Source) and (Source)
Pak revenue collection 2008: Rs. 990 billion (Source)
Pak revenue collection 2009: Rs. 1150 billion (Source) and (Source)

Pak Foreign reserves in 1999: $ 1.96 billion (Source)
Pak Foreign reserves in 2007: $ 16.4 billion (Source) and (Source)
Pak Foreign reserves in 2008: $ 8.89 billion (Source)
Pak Foreign reserves in 2009: $ 14.4 billion (*Source*)

Pak Exports in 1999: $ 8 billion (Source) & (Source)
Pak Exports in 2007: $ 18.5 billion (*Source*) & (Source)
Pak Exports in 2008: $ 19.22 billion (Source) & (Source)
Pak Exports in 2009: $ 17.78 billion (Source) & (Source)

Textile Exports in 1999: $ 5.5 billion (Source)
Textile Exports in 2007: $ 11.2 billion (Source)


Foreign Investment in 1999: $ 301 million (Source)
Foreign Investment in 2007: $ 8.4 billion (Source)
Foreign Investment in 2008: $ 5.19 billion (Source)

Large Scale Manufacturing (LSM) in 1999: 1.5% ( Source)
Large Scale Manufacturing (LSM) in 2005: 19.9% (Source)
Large Scale Manufacturing (LSM) in 2007: 8.8% (Source)
Large Scale Manufacturing (LSM) in 2008: 4.1% (Source) & (Source)
Large Scale Manufacturing (LSM) in 2009: (-8.2 %) (Source)

Debt (External Debt & Liabilities) in 1988: $ 18 billion
Debt (External Debt & Liabilities) in 1999: $ 39 billion (Source) & (Source)
Debt (External Debt & Liabilities) in 2007: $ 40.5 billion (Source) & (Source)
Debt (External Debt & Liabilities) in 2009: $ 52 billion (Source) & (Source)

Debt servicing 1999: 65% of GDP (Source) & (Source)
Debt servicing 2007: 28.1% of GDP (Source) & (Source)
Debt servicing 2008: 27% of GDP (Source)
Debt servicing 2009: 32% of GDP (Source)

Poverty level in 1999: 34% (Source) and (Source)
Poverty level in 2007: 24% (Source) and (Source)

Literacy rate in 1999: 45% (Source)
Literacy rate in 2007: 53% (Source) and

Pak Development programs 1999: Rs. 80 billion (Source)
Pak Development programs 2007: Rs. 520 billion (Source)
Pak Development programs 2008: Rs. 549.7 billion (Source)
Pak Development programs 2010: Rs. 300 billion (Source)



> Updated June 2010!
> 
> Compiled by our friends: _*Mirza Rohail B and Afreen Baig*_


The above figures speak themselves about the level of corruption between all the democratic govts. and his era.

As regard Pakistan's sovereignty sold for $$$, well, it was already been sold but the difference is that $$$ in mush era were used by Pakistan and in rest of the cases these are lying in Swiss accounts / Saudi Arabia.

other things which are normally taken as negative on part of mush, are
-Bugti Killing
-Lal Masjid Operation
-NRO
-Removal of Chief Justice


Well, i ll also post about the reality of these as well, to clarify Sir Mush Position.

I ll also post the prices comparison of commodities of basis necessities of life.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Rafael

z9-ec said:


> I'm eagerly waiting for people to see if he comes into power what he will do.
> 
> It's easier to say things that please the masses but once you're President of Pakistan and told about the ground realities. Things change. He himself mentioned a few days ago on national TV that if Pakistan pulls out of WoT Pakistan will suffer loss in terms of KHARABS of ruppees.
> 
> Pakistan needs friends not enemies as I mentioned earlier. Having the worlds only super power as your enemy would be disastrous.



Ground realities? What ground realities? No Pakistani was involved in 9/11. If I'm not wrong, the then secretary of defense denied any calls to Musharaff threating him of being bombed to stone ages. Even if he did, what did they do about Iran after threatening them of an attack? North Korea? 




z9-ec said:


> He was the first army general to confront extremists and recognize the threat they are to Pakistan. Had he not joined WoT, the consequences were severe to say the least. I think Abottabad raid vindicates it




He was the head of the Govt and the army chief responsible for giving Taliban/AQ a safe place in Pakistan. Why did he let them have their sanctuaries in Pakistan in the first place? 

And You didn't mention anything about NRO?


----------



## S.M.R

raheel1 said:


> Ground realities? What ground realities? No Pakistani was involved in 9/11. If I'm not wrong, the then secretary of defense denied any calls to Musharaff threating him of being bombed to stone ages. Even if he did, what did they do about Iran after threatening them of an attack? North Korea?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He was the head of the Govt and the army chief responsible for giving Taliban/AQ a safe place in Pakistan. Why did he let them have their sanctuaries in Pakistan in the first place?
> 
> And You didn't mention anything about NRO?


 
Well it was decided by US to invade afghanistan, a clear message was given to Mush. Can you tell the other options we had at that time? You are able to post your views as you are not living in the country like Afghanistan / Iraq.

Where did he gave safe heavens to Taliban / AQ in Pakistan. They came into Pakistan from Afghanistan, due to unsecure border. He tried his best to secure (fencing) Afghan border, but US / Afghani govt. is strictly against that. Well you talk about Iran, it is on their strike list. First they needed to ensure their presence in the region through Afghanistan / Pakistan, they will certainly go after Iran. North Korea is entirely not comparable.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## z9-ec

raheel1 said:


> Ground realities? What ground realities? No Pakistani was involved in 9/11. If I'm not wrong, the then secretary of defense denied any calls to Musharaff threating him of being bombed to stone ages. Even if he did, what did they do about Iran after threatening them of an attack? North Korea?



Actions speak louder than words.

Abottabad. Ring any bells?




> He was the head of the Govt and the army chief responsible for giving Taliban/AQ a safe place in Pakistan. Why did he let them have their sanctuaries in Pakistan in the first place?
> 
> And You didn't mention anything about NRO?



I have mentioned NRO read my previous posts.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## S.M.R

Well, actually the comparison is Technically Wrong 

What made me to say that, is we have tried Sir Mush and Imran is yet to be tried.

If one asks between the two, I will go with Mush as Pakistan is not in a Position of 'Experiments'.

Well....Both of them are faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar better than other govts.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## moha199

Zaki FX said:


> well i have had enough arguments in past
> 
> See pressler amendment had forced our economy to low growth rate during 90s and there is no doubt both PPP and PML-N were only failures and are most corrupt parties in Pakistan but lets see everything in right angle.
> 
> When Musharraf came, almost all sanctions were lifted and the world itself was offering lucrative offers to Pakistan to seek their support in War on Terror. That was not a standalone policy by Pakistan but the entire world witnessed statements from foreign nations saying "USA awarded F-16s contract to Pakistan for their support in War on Terror" and other nations provided funds, investment and other stuff only for the sole sake.
> 
> Now I can remember there were only 1G mobile phones during 90s and the telecommunication industry was very limited but since past 10 years this industry expanded multiple times and increasing like 50% each year. There was also very small industry for IT, Electronic Media and various electronic devices introduced in past 10 years. These industries increased by multiple times resulting in billions of dollars worth of investment all over the world by the top entities of each respective company and directly reflecting towards the growth rate of each nation. This growth rate was not only limited to Pakistan but the entire world witnessed similar growth rate (especially the poor states thanks to their cheap labour).
> 
> I am not taking any credit away from Musharraf but still these growth rate and figures do not reflect the complete image of Pakistan. See a poor man in Pakistan whose basic earning was probably 1000 rupees 10 years ago was able to buy more food for himself than what he is buying with 5000 rupees in today's era. There has been higher inflation than the growth rate or rise in salaries. The life-style of poor man has further been hampered instead of comfort you may have been thinking about. See I could eat my whole school lunch back in 90s with only 5 rupees or buy good quality of clothes with less than 500 rupees but nowadays you won't get a quality cloth for less than 8000 rupees on any good shopping centre. So if the salary of a poor man increased and so did the inflation?
> 
> Most of the growth what Musharraf era shows was largely benefited to the richer people of Pakistan and middle class up to certain extent. Now if you say Musharraf gave a blunt statement against American invasion in Pakistan then I would have to take it as a mere statement because he was the one who allowed drone attacks in the country and he was the one who allowed Blackwater and intelligence agencies in Pakistan. If you don't believe just type on youtube and you will find videos dating back to 2007 when blackwater and other intelligence agencies was roaming freely in Pakistan.
> 
> Yes he did brought $$$ in the country but at the same time he also brought drone attacks, blackwater, intelligence agencies, suicide bombers and extremism in the country. What about those people that he sold to America and were later released by the Americans finding them innocents and torchering them for an year or more than that? Who is responsible for anger of Baloch brothers? Who is responsible for NRO topi-drama that has put puppets and clowns in command who should have rather be living behind the bars.... it can be very long
> 
> PS: I am senior member does not mean i must follow anyone's opinion... I am a Pakistani and reserve my right to give my opinion. I like Musharraf for various economic policies but at the same time I hate him for having a very weak foreign policy that us forced us to be felt like a criminal state before the world.


again i failed to understand what you wanna say that ok it was Musharraf who did good and you don't wanna take away the credit but it happen because world was going towards modernization and Musharraf had to do it? lol bro to your last statement i never meant to say that you should follow me or anyone what i meant to say that you must be on this forum for long time and you must not forget what happen back then? You said that Musharraf threat was a mere statement! well that statement cost USA their soldiers life. some small scale battles and yet all was drama! you say that Musharraf allowed drone attacks? heck with your and your leaders kept accusing Musharraf for drone attacks! Musharraf had said it over 100 times that there were no permission to USA on drone attacks! ONLY surveillance! do you know what it means????? geez dude you guys are just kept beating drums. 9 drone attacks during Musharraf time from 2001 to 2008 6 were targeted towards pakistani terrorists, including mullah fm baitullah masood, etc. and after Musharraf 317 attacks. during Musharraf era, one drone attacks and 3 NATO supplies used to be burnt, NATO hamvees used to be stolen, during Musharraf time, USA used to say we apologize and after Musharraf USA say we will do it more and do what you wanna do! yet Musharraf is bad, what did you want? PAF shooting drones down? and then FA18 coming along with drones and taking out first Pakistani instillations then bomb ruthlessly so then the entire world say that what a force Pakistan is? did you forget recent OBL operation? what happen to Pakistani technology? people like you forget that there is something called stealth technology and also they forget that we are 3rd world country and even China doesn't share that technology with Pakistan. it reminds me of a saying "khasyani billi challi khamba nochnay" you spoke of that Pakistan was sanctioned? dude it was only military sanction! during 90s Pakistan recived 2.5 billion in loan grants and aid, but it was strictly none military, you mentioned that Musharraf was given F16 and seriously ZAK never get blind in hate, It was Musharraf who was running around to complete JF17 project, sometimes he was going to Germany sometimes he was going to russia for engines sometimes he was going to Switzerland etc we all know how we put up all this, we also know that how Musharraf was running around to ukrine to get the engines for ALKHALID etc, all was done so Pakistan come out of american control atleast military wise and he did well on this and today we are posting that INDIA acknowledge PAF as superior force! you mentioned that today people are saying that we are way behind and true they are believing this and saying this but is it because of Musharraf? WTF for 8 years this guy kept prices in control and pakistani economy on rising and new government came and they raised prices, blamed it on Musharraf because he was amir and it is easy to do that then they shut down the electric by doing fake propaganda that Musharraf didn't make dams but actually he did but Pakistan is facing this problem because of not paying for oil which is used for electric so basically bad bills which current government didn't pay and put the money to their pockets and put the blame on Musharraf and people like you bought it as well. You mentioned NRO? it was your supreme Alla Hazrat CJ dajal who cleared ZARDARI and BB from 7 cases and now he is saying NRO is wrong, well me and everyone realized now including Musharraf that NRO was a bad POLITICAL move, but even according to NRO bb wasn't allowed to contest in election. i mean i have heard even IMRAN KHAN including hamid mir and all the talk show host saying during 2007 that how can these elections can be free and fair when two main stream parties and their leaders are not allowed to take hand in election? but when BB broke the deal and later killed by her husband, it was the Pakistani nation who voted for PPP and PMLN and now you wanna blame Musharraf? are you suggesting me that Musharraf intentionally made PMLQ lose election? no buddy it were the nation of Pakistan which picked these people according to QURAN " JESI QOOM WASAY HUKUMRAN" now this nation is paying for it and blaming on Musharraf, who took two bullets for this nation who fought three wars from front, who gave 50 years to this nation and yet he is traitor. a guy who is not even charged by his worst enemies that he is corrupt money wise! this old guy is working is butt of at the age of 67 by giving out lectures in the world and collecting money! for his election campaign and yet he is bad, lets stop this none sense, the thread was that if Musharraf gave best answer or IK i said Musharraf because he hit americans and indians on their dukti nabs by saying that 26/11 was a failure so was 911 but does it mean that RAW or CIA was working with terrorist?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## moha199

she is hot and she has brain and she is pro musharraf and wait and watch after Musharraf land! i love her hahahahaha sexy beast


innocentboy said:


> If that is the criteria then what about Marvi Memon

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## moha199

raheel1 said:


> Ground realities? What ground realities? No Pakistani was involved in 9/11. If I'm not wrong, the then secretary of defense denied any calls to Musharaff threating him of being bombed to stone ages. Even if he did, what did they do about Iran after threatening them of an attack? North Korea?
> 
> And You didn't mention anything about NRO?


 Raheel bhai Pakistan doesn't have oil! let me remind you that when Bush wanted to attack iran in 2006 do you know that patrol in USA went as high as $7 gallon where it used to be $2:15 and you talking about N KOREA? are we N koreans? answer is no and no way. north koreans don't have life they worship their leader as god and i mean what i say THEY WORSHIP THEIR LEADER AS GOD. they all work for government and they get food from government and that food is not chicken etc! go read about N KOREANS. secondly people who talk about N KOREAN? Must read history of AMERICAN AND CHINES CEASE FIRE" 
Korean War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 
NOW YOU SAYING THAT WHY DID MUSHARRAF LET TALIBANS TAKE SANCTUARIES IN PAKISTAN? WELL MY ANSWER IS HE DIDN'T..... WE ALL GREW UP WITH STORIES OF ALLAQA GAIR AND STOP BEING HYPOCRITE, Army usually use the term that Pakistan conquered the area which had talibans in it. see this is the problem my friends that you guys don't know the history and you guys are jumping the guns. well i will say it only once and these are headlines and rest you go do research. Pakistan didn't have forces in alaqa gair meaning the entire Pakistan beyond dara in Pashawar. now when americans came to Afghanistan at that time afghan talibans came to Pakistani area and in 2002 when Pakistani army tried to go in to secure the boarder, these tribal people didn't like outsiders meaning Pak FOJ because many of them also don't accepted pak afghan boarder under Durante line. now these talibans started and launched cross boarder attack on NATO forces from pakistan and when americans followed them they entered Pakistan. and americans weren't allowed to come into Pakistan. on this americans made so much noise and passed serious threats of cross boarder conflicts. Pak foj decided to cut the deal with real tribal elders in 2002 who supported Musharraf and Pakistan but TTP talibans killed 290 MALIKS in one day and eliminated entire tribal leadership which resulted in army action in tribal region. because Pakistan didn't have their own people well after this Pak foj made the next generation into leadership meaning the kids of those maliks but same thing happened in end of 2003 which made army to take strong action and actually seal the boarder and this is where all these terrorist went against Musharraf that he is not letting us do jihad against americans etc and all trouble started and jinni came out of the bottle now when Musharraf ordered to strike back, many people acted like chickens and went against Musharraf. now read more about it, go do research. listen to army generals who were posted there during that time. even some personal level anti Musharraf generals ended up supporting Musharraf on TV because actions were legit from Pakistani interest point of view

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafael

z9-ec said:


> Actions speak louder than words.
> 
> Abottabad. Ring any bells?



Abottabad happened because our military and civilian Govt. is addicted to US aid. Had this been any other country, she would have had protested strongly in UN and other foras. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. So no comparisons between post 9/11 and Abottabad raid.



z9-ec said:


> I have mentioned NRO read my previous posts.



I am unable to see it. Kindly highlight it. 

Cheers!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stealth

comparing icon of terrorism with imran khan lol

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## laiqs@mi

OHhh h h h '
remember one thing Mush was a phatoooooooo
on one call he bow down to USa ..... 
lanat ho yar aisa leader ... kal india nay koi threat kar dia to yeh to apni ...... tak day dega.


----------



## Leader

There is NO comparison between a military dictator and a civilian leader.


to compare itself is shameful that we look at night-watch-man as leader? 

even compare Zardari vs Musharraf I would go with Zardari since we, the Nation elected him.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

cheekybird said:


> Im all up for imran khan,he follows his heart,he's brave,not corrupt.He has been saying this for years that pakistan should go out on wot and time has proved him right,look where we are now because of jumping into wot,and except imran khan i dont see any other politition who can take pakistan out of this mess.And i would definately not want another army coup in my country so hope Imran khan does the job of a good leader.


 
thats the whole point he follows from his heart not from head .u Need to think from head that whats matters


----------



## ahsanraza81

Imran Khan is my choice and many like-minded people


----------



## lover_of_Ahlulbayt

*Mushy by far is the BEST in diplomacy as compared to all the baboons in Pakistan! He uses BRAINS as oppose to HEART!

You tell'em Z9_ec and tell all these Mushy haters that how awesome Mushy is!*

*
Long live Mushy and PTI + APML + MQM alliance, InshahAllah! Instead of fighting with each other, PTI and APML should ALLIANT together!*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Leader

lover_of_Ahlulbayt said:


> *Mushy by far is the BEST in diplomacy as compared to all the baboons in Pakistan! He uses BRAINS as oppose to HEART!
> 
> You tell'em Z9_ec and tell all these Mushy haters that how awesome Mushy is!*
> 
> *
> Long live Mushy and PTI + APML + MQM alliance, InshahAllah! Instead of fighting with each other, PTI and APML should ALLIANT together!*


 
I would rather like to see IK becoming Asghar Khan than making this alliance... he has already said "Qoam mujhay aik or galti per maaf nahi kare gi."


----------



## moha199

Cheap comment! if you go dig back you will see that Pakistan allowed and accepted all terms on sep 29th 2001 when terms were given on sep 12th 2001 so i don't know which phone call are you talking about! and we have posted all the information. you guys are way late on this forum to talk about 911 MODS and webmaster should really bring forth those threads where we had posted all the information, the early version of wiki leaks dated way back in 2005/2006 ... where we had proves that Pakistan tried all what i could to save Talibans from american wrath. the cabals which proved that Pashah was keep going back and forth to work things out, and when talibans refused on 26th sep 2001 flat out this is when Pakistan decided to cooperate with NATO forces


laiqs@mi said:


> OHhh h h h '
> remember one thing Mush was a phatoooooooo
> on one call he bow down to USa .....
> lanat ho yar aisa leader ... kal india nay koi threat kar dia to yeh to apni ...... tak day dega.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## moha199

Leader said:


> There is NO comparison between a military dictator and a civilian leader.
> 
> 
> to compare itself is shameful that we look at night-watch-man as leader?
> 
> even compare Zardari vs Musharraf I would go with Zardari since we, the Nation elected him.


 
I mean what can i say to you since your comment is shameful as it is, and debating on this or you over this comment is cheap as it is your comment. YOU ARE RIGHT AND WE ARE WRONG ON THIS, STAY HAPPY WITH ZARDARI BABA


----------



## AstanoshKhan

Who on earth is going to Vote for that Hardcore drinker - Musharraf, whose spokesperson just recently found guilty in possession of Alcohol.


----------



## Leader

moha199 said:


> I mean what can i say to you since your comment is shameful as it is, and debating on this or you over this comment is cheap as it is your comment. YOU ARE RIGHT AND WE ARE WRONG ON THIS, STAY HAPPY WITH ZARDARI BABA


 
just showing how wrong it is to compare a military dictator with any Civilian leaders, you can still go by the letter if you like.

---------- Post added at 11:18 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:17 AM ----------




AstanoshKhan said:


> Who on earth is going to Vote for that Hardcore drinker - Musharraf, whose spokesperson just recently found guilty in possession of Alcohol.


 
who after consultation with Musharraf resigned from Vice-presidency of APML....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AstanoshKhan

Leader said:


> who after consultation with Musharraf resigned from Vice-presidency of APML....


 
No one talks about Musharraf only a handful e-supporters. I wonder when Musharraf himself is going to give up on Alcohol? Isn't this hypocrisy that he consumes alcohol, watched shows of dancing Shahida Minni, brought that Roshan Khayali to our people but yet he used a religion card to deceive the masses of Pakistan - All Pakistan *Muslim* League. If it is not hypocrisy and deception, then what it is?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## moha199

AstanoshKhan said:


> Who on earth is going to Vote for that Hardcore drinker - Musharraf, whose spokesperson just recently found guilty in possession of Alcohol.


 
ok seriously you guys are throwing cheap around! first of all It is all known to Pakistan that PPP and PMLN are trying their best to stop APML and PTI new parties to emerge and they will do anything meaning any accusation to put parties down. Atiqa Oudo isn't stupid who will if she does drink, will bring alcohol on plan or carry it on plain and check in in baggage WTF it speaks for itself. now your question that Musharraf drinks and who will vote for him? hahah same for those who support adulterous and heavy drinker imran khan! now my comments were just to meet you on your level. which i usually don't do it. what a shameful act some members do on this forum.


----------



## AstanoshKhan

@ Moha 19

No one is playing cheap here. The real question is why Musharraf himself is using the Religion Card to deceive the masses but on other hand he promotes Roshan Khayali? Refer to my post no 60 please.


> All Pakistan *Muslim* League. If it is not hypocrisy and deception, then what it is?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## moha199

ok seriously i seriously expected PTI supporters a little different from pmln/ppp supporters. Who the fk say he drink alcohol seems like he has been drinking with your elders isn't it? or with your? or you have seen him yourself? WTF what a cheap comments are we getting on this forum? Prove me one place Musharraf where he is drinking? i can be saying that Imran khan still drinks with his sisters along with benazir and zardari? but does it support my cheap comment? answer is no! now grow up on this kind of moronic statements bro. Wanna talk about politics then talk about it. Fact is that when you have no argument you will go on personality! We have nailed all who were against Musharraf on every step way back now new comments like you are just jumping the guns with no knowledge of history. let me also say that this forum used to keep some information which it doesn't. it's more like yahoo chat room, You will never see APML member or supporter to come up and say that imran is this or that we all say that support Musharraf or Imran or any who is not tested but don't support PMLN and PPP who are tested and failed. We believe that Musharraf is tested and successful, you think that Imran khan is better but it doesn't give you a right to call names to a person who has given 50 years of his and his family life to Pakistan, who has faced bullets tanks and aerial bombardment and who was and still is ready to give his life for this nation. Unlike Zardari nawaz who had just delivered some emotional speeches and nothing else. Now imran khan is not a bad guy but i personally like Musharraf but it doesn't mean that who doesn't vote imran khan is traitor or anyone who is standing against PTI in elections is traitor. WTF is wrong with this nation man. instead of joining hands with people who had been loyal to Pakistan and who had led country to prosperity, you guys just wanna pick on them not corrupt nawaz and zardari???? fine Musharraf was a dictator and now he isn't! he is coming as political leader who will be seeking votes! just like imran zardari or nawaz. Show some respect to elders secondly. This is exactly PMLN and PPP want. devision in newer parties so they gain and this is exactly what is happening. It's time to say that lets be realistic and support PAKISTAN FIRST not PTI first imran first or Musharraf first. it's PAKISTAN FIRST. APML members or supporters know that it is impossible for any party to win election as whole and we will be needing alliances and we will pick PTI and MQM but i guess some people still live in fools paradise who say they will mark elections as whole! 


AstanoshKhan said:


> @ Moha 19
> 
> No one is playing cheap here. The real question is Musharraf himself is using the Religion Card to deceive the masses. Refer to my post no 60 please.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## moha199

*My upper comment is a bit harsh but i guess members should need to learn how to talk sensible. This isn't yahoo chat. On this forum we have discussed that pakistan joining WOT was not an option but only way, We also acknowledged as whole members especially old ones including webmaster that Musharraf was loyal and is loyal and he was the best of what Pakistan ever had, now all of the sudden when man steps away for two years and media starts to change mood of people, many fell for propaganda and many chickened out but it doesn't prove that Musharraf was a bad guy. Lets work together and work for Pakistan and flush out morons like PPP PMLN old and tested fail political parties *


----------



## S.M.R

Leader said:


> There is NO comparison between a military dictator and a civilian leader.
> 
> 
> to compare itself is shameful that we look at night-watch-man as leader?
> 
> even compare Zardari vs Musharraf *I would go with Zardari since we, the Nation elected him.*


 
Very negative / heart breaking comment from you indeed. Tussi tay dil hi tor ditta ji. I dont know why people are so fond of 'procedures' rather than results. How Zardari was elected by 'YOU' everybody knows it. He smartly used Bewakoof tareen politician 'nawaz sharif' for the purpose. NS was so out of his mind against Mush bcaz he kicked him out from Govt, so NS was used by Zardari as Toilet paper. Do you really think that he is representative of the 'Nation'?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kompromat

z9-ec said:


> Without doubt, Musharraf is the best diplomatic entity



Specify your claims and back it up with valid arguments which must reflect his past record. 




> Pakistan has and needs to ensure it's survival.



A dictator is one big threat to this country's survival - ie Adolf hitler who came into power through ballet.




> His stature in the international community in itself vindicates of how well he performed during his tenure.



How well ? i think he destroyed this country from within , from Pashtuns to Baloch all are turning against Pakistan just because of the ruthless "you wont know what hit you" policies -- you call it international stature - one has to be out of his mind to believe you.



> I have statistics to prove it.



Bring the statics ! im waiting.



> Pakistan needs friends not enemies.



Yet Musharraf created more and more enemies ! Angered balochs , Pashtuns , attacked a Mosque ! - you call that "creating friends" ? i disagree and rather call it absolute lunacy.


> Trade not aid as honorable Gen. (r) Musharraf put it.



Yet he never refused aid  - Pakistan is in this mess because of his mind boggling policies regarding war on terror - his decisions have cost us 60 plus billion dollars so far in economic loss.



> No debate. What Imran Khan is preaching equates to surrender to the T and AQ in turn for peace.



Imran is not preaching "surrender" to terrorists - he is rather preaching the path of "debate , reconciliation & negotiations" - your cheap shot at Imran has just back fired !



> Not only will the world condemn us, we will, in effect be isolated.



Do you think we already are not isolated ? My God i am starting to have doubts in your sanity ! -- Holland pulled out of Afghanistan years ago are they Isolated ? NO they have actually survived the global economic crunch by ending their policy over WOT & now everyone else in EU is paying the price for their stupidity.




> His foreign policy is based on impractical standards.



Elaborate more & back your claims with valid proofs which can be verified in recent history -- mindless dogmas are not accepted. 



> He's oblivious to ground realities.



How exactly ?



> Even his own party members do not know how he plans to deal with the cancerous radicals and extremism.
> .



How do you know that his party members are unaware of his policies over WOT if so why his party members join him in Dharnas ?

 you are just making yourself look like a fool.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## S.M.R

AstanoshKhan said:


> No one talks about Musharraf only a handful e-supporters. I wonder when Musharraf himself is going to give up on Alcohol? Isn't this hypocrisy that he consumes alcohol, watched shows of dancing Shahida Minni, brought that Roshan Khayali to our people but yet he used a religion card to deceive the masses of Pakistan - All Pakistan *Muslim* League. If it is not hypocrisy and deception, then what it is?


 
Hypocrisy is not limited, well i ll not go into 'personal' details of IK but would like to refer that he can not be member of parliament based on his 'personal' matters:



> Const. of Pakistan
> 62.	Qualifications for membership of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)
> (d)	he is of good character and is not commonly known as one who violates Islamic Injunctions;


----------



## S.M.R

AstanoshKhan said:


> @ Moha 19
> 
> No one is playing cheap here. The real question is why Musharraf himself is using the Religion Card to deceive the masses but on other hand he promotes Roshan Khayali? Refer to my post no 60 please.


 
Tehrik e *Insaf*

Did he do insaf to his 'love child'??? If it is not hypocrisy and deception, then what it is?

If you will bring personal things in debate, it will derail the thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Leader

innocentboy said:


> Very negative / heart breaking comment from you indeed. Tussi tay dil hi tor ditta ji. I dont know why people are so fond of 'procedures' rather than results. How Zardari was elected by 'YOU' everybody knows it. He smartly used Bewakoof tareen politician 'nawaz sharif' for the purpose. NS was so out of his mind against Mush bcaz he kicked him out from Govt, so NS was used by Zardari as Toilet paper. Do you really think that he is representative of the 'Nation'?


 
Yes, he represent our NATION, he played well with his cards, whats wrong with it ? this is what corrupt people like him do... 

and how did he got elected is exactly the result of NOT following the Procedures...Institutionalization of the power is required, and that comes through procedures and process...which military boots have destroyed every now and then...

but as long as our constitution doesnot allow military interference, we should not support any dictator for the sake of our state... we the commoners must get strong to defend our state, the state which is because of us, not because of its institution called military.

if theocracy is giving results, if British Raj is giving results,if talibees are giving results, what will you say?


----------



## Leader

innocentboy said:


> Tehrik e *Insaf*
> 
> Did he do insaf to his 'love child'??? If it is not hypocrisy and deception, then what it is?
> 
> If you will bring personal things in debate, it will derail the thread.


 
even on this level you cannot compare IK with mush. since IK has transformed into a new person, a muslim to begin with... while mush is still what he was...characterless... and there is nothing known change in his thoughts....


----------



## laiqs@mi

and how many time I.K in his interviews said his wish is to brought his children back to pak . but its rule in brit that before 16 childs must stay with there mother. 
so going to conclusion read or listen a bit.


----------



## Pioneerfirst

Both were friends in past,and may again in future


----------



## Rafael

innocentboy said:


> Tehrik e *Insaf*
> 
> *Did he do insaf to his 'love child'*??? If it is not hypocrisy and deception, then what it is?
> 
> If you will bring personal things in debate, it will derail the thread.



His love child as you claim it lives with her mother. She has no issues there, her mother has no issues keeping her and neither any laws of that country have issues with it as the matter is settled. 

What "insaf" are you talking about?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## U-571

innocentboy said:


> Tehrik e *Insaf*
> 
> Did he do insaf to his 'love child'??? If it is not hypocrisy and deception, then what it is?
> 
> If you will bring personal things in debate, it will derail the thread.


 
yes, but musharraf did a very good insaf ???


----------



## U-571

i dont say imran is a good political material but this musharraf is the worst scum of the earth


----------



## Leader

Pioneerfirst said:


> Both were friends in past,and may again in future




mmmmuuuahahahahha.................


----------



## S.M.R

Leader said:


> even on this level you cannot compare IK with mush. since IK has transformed into a new person, a muslim to begin with... while mush is still what he was...characterless... and there is nothing known change in his thoughts....


 
100 choohay pooray ho gayay? Lol..

Well I sincerely respect IK in all aspects, even I am a person of type who like keep personal matters away from professional matters. Imran is good even excellent. Normally person gets involve in corruption due to greed of money and to become famous. Imran was fortunate enough of already possessing both of them. So he is not corrupt at all, might be the reason he was not 'able' to? as Pakistan main shareef wohi hai jissay 'Moqa nahi mila'.
Since Imran was never in Power so what ever he says is yet to be proved. Every party's manifesto is to make pakistan heaven. We need to experiment Imran that how will he manage whatever he is doing buland o baagh daway. I respect his views, as those are of a common Pakistani.

We have seen the Musharraf era, his policies, all might not be correct, but far better than those of other parties. The one thing about Imran which I dont like that he joined hands with the corrupt politicians just to get rid of Musharraf. Democracy is a beauty if that is result of some literate people, otherwise democracy becomes 'revenge' (like our current democracy).

IK is a good leader in deed, but Mush has the quality to do whatever he says, and he does it with courage.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## S.M.R

U-571 said:


> yes, but musharraf did a very good insaf ???


 
means? plz elaborate.


----------



## S.M.R

Leader said:


> Yes, he represent our NATION, he played well with his cards, whats wrong with it ? this is what corrupt people like him do...
> 
> and how did he got elected is exactly the result of NOT following the Procedures...Institutionalization of the power is required, and that comes through procedures and process...which military boots have destroyed every now and then...
> 
> but as long as our constitution doesnot allow military interference, we should not support any dictator for the sake of our state... we the commoners must get strong to defend our state, the state which is because of us, not because of its institution called military.
> 
> if theocracy is giving results, if British Raj is giving results,if talibees are giving results, what will you say?


 
i m getting confused, lol.

To you a 'corrupt person' is acceptable if chosen by Nation?


----------



## Leader

innocentboy said:


> *100 choohay pooray ho gayay?* Lol..
> 
> Well I sincerely respect IK in all aspects, even I am a person of type who like keep personal matters away from professional matters. Imran is good even excellent. Normally person gets involve in corruption due to greed of money and to become famous. Imran was fortunate enough of already possessing both of them. So he is not corrupt at all, might be the reason he was not 'able' to? as Pakistan main shareef wohi hai jissay 'Moqa nahi mila'.
> Since Imran was never in Power so what ever he says is yet to be proved. Every party's manifesto is to make pakistan heaven. We need to experiment Imran that how will he manage whatever he is doing buland o baagh daway. I respect his views, as those are of a common Pakistani.
> 
> We have seen the Musharraf era, his policies, all might not be correct, but far better than those of other parties. The one thing about Imran which I dont like that he joined hands with the corrupt politicians just to get rid of Musharraf. Democracy is a beauty if that is result of some literate people, otherwise democracy becomes 'revenge' (like our current democracy).
> 
> IK is a good leader in deed, but Mush has the quality to do whatever he says, and he does it with courage.


 
900 ho gai hain  

he has everything, even by the looks of his face, no comparison whatsoever.... speculation wont take you anywhere...just avoid envy, it helps alot to know what Imran Khan is.
Yes he is yet to be tested. and surely will prove to be worthy of it. unlike others Buland o Baagh Daway,

he always says Objectives should not be compromised... and he sticks with it.

no comments on what musharraf brough to this country... we all know whose mess is this... dont single out musharraf from it...they were all in it...


----------



## S.M.R

Leader said:


> 900 ho gai hain
> 
> he has everything, even by the looks of his face, no comparison whatsoever.... speculation wont take you anywhere...just avoid envy, it helps alot to know what Imran Khan is.
> Yes he is yet to be tested. and surely will prove to be worthy of it. unlike others Buland o Baagh Daway,
> 
> he always says Objectives should not be compromised... and he sticks with it.
> 
> no comments on what musharraf brough to this country... we all know whose mess is this... dont single out musharraf from it...they were all in it...


 
What if IK and Mush join hands together??? as IK said he is ready to make coalition with ANY one except______.


----------



## Leader

innocentboy said:


> i m getting confused, lol.
> 
> To you a 'corrupt person' is acceptable if chosen by Nation?


 
yes, since he would eventually be replaced by someone in 5 years time, and Nation will be the process to improve itself for the next time....as compared to any military dictator who violate my, your and ours political rights to begin with...


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

AstanoshKhan said:


> No one talks about Musharraf only a handful e-supporters. I wonder when Musharraf himself is going to give up on Alcohol? Isn't this hypocrisy that he consumes alcohol, watched shows of dancing Shahida Minni, brought that Roshan Khayali to our people but yet he used a religion card to deceive the masses of Pakistan - All Pakistan *Muslim* League. If it is not hypocrisy and deception, then what it is?


 i just wanna know my dear that since u accused that musharraf is a hard core drinker i want a proof ok nothing more and nothing less second tell me my dear which politician isnot a drinker which politicion is not a pimp good are only those who dont get caught third this point aside i just wanna know how did u assume that since his spokeperson was found with sharab he is a drinker too yara plz dont get emotional reply with reason and politeness


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

A.Muqeet khan said:


> i just wanna know my dear that since u accused that musharraf is a hard core drinker i want a proof ok nothing more and nothing less second tell me my dear which politician isnot a drinker which politicion is not a pimp good are only those who dont get caught third this point aside i just wanna know how did u assume that since his spokeperson was found with sharab he is a drinker too yara plz dont get emotional reply with reason and politeness


 
To stupid members who would assume that i am promoting a burai just because every one does it all i was saying is that this cant be the criteria cause if that the case why did ppp came to power they to are hard core drinker yet ppl voted for them i was just replying to that person this logic i dont care was he a drinker or not all i know is that under him pakistani economy was at its best that all that matters


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

Aeronaut said:


> Specify your claims and back it up with valid arguments which must reflect his past record.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A dictator is one big threat to this country's survival - ie Adolf hitler who came into power through ballet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How well ? i think he destroyed this country from within , from Pashtuns to Baloch all are turning against Pakistan just because of the ruthless "you wont know what hit you" policies -- you call it international stature - one has to be out of his mind to believe you.
> 
> 
> 
> Bring the statics ! im waiting.
> 
> 
> 
> Yet Musharraf created more and more enemies ! Angered balochs , Pashtuns , attacked a Mosque ! - you call that "creating friends" ? i disagree and rather call it absolute lunacy.
> 
> 
> Yet he never refused aid  - Pakistan is in this mess because of his mind boggling policies regarding war on terror - his decisions have cost us 60 plus billion dollars so far in economic loss.
> 
> 
> 
> Imran is not preaching "surrender" to terrorists - he is rather preaching the path of "debate , reconciliation & negotiations" - your cheap shot at Imran has just back fired !
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think we already are not isolated ? My God i am starting to have doubts in your sanity ! -- Holland pulled out of Afghanistan years ago are they Isolated ? NO they have actually survived the global economic crunch by ending their policy over WOT & now everyone else in EU is paying the price for their stupidity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elaborate more & back your claims with valid proofs which can be verified in recent history -- mindless dogmas are not accepted.
> 
> 
> 
> How exactly ?
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know that his party members are unaware of his policies over WOT if so why his party members join him in Dharnas ?
> 
> you are just making yourself look like a fool.


 
how about ataturk or mahatir muhammad how about that jewish dictator in utopia who has brought utopia from drought a regional power in Africa. that logic of ur is invaldid and literally stupid .for all i know democracy to is a threat to pakistan s well

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

A.Muqeet khan said:


> how about ataturk or mahatir muhammad how about that jewish dictator in utopia who has brought utopia from drought a regional power in Africa. that logic of ur is invaldid and literally stupid .for all i know democracy to is a threat to pakistan s well


 
How is all that relevant to what i said ? - Democracy is a threat to Pakistan -- yes to delusional dictatorial morons like you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

Aeronaut said:


> How is all that relevant to what i said ? - Democracy is a threat to Pakistan -- yes to delusional dictatorial morons like you.


 
well it is cause democracy is for the country where people are educated they are not slaves neither under the rule of feudal lords this country has both people who lack brains people who lack education a country with record low middle class a country where people believe every thing that is thrown at them yes democracy may be the best system but its not for this country of that i am also certain at least not now every one has different opinion and so have i but that doesn't allow u to go personally out for me after all there is a saying that "if he starts preaching his thoughts by attacking other then either he is paranoid or he never had any decent parents to began with "


----------



## z9-ec

raheel1 said:


> Abottabad happened because our military and civilian Govt. is addicted to US aid. Had this been any other country, she would have had protested strongly in UN and other foras. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. So no comparisons between post 9/11 and Abottabad raid.



How is it not? who was UBL? what was he accused of? 



AstanoshKhan said:


> @ Moha 19
> 
> No one is playing cheap here. The real question is why Musharraf himself is using the Religion Card to deceive the masses but on other hand he promotes Roshan Khayali? Refer to my post no 60 please.


 
By that logic, whats your opinion of Jinnah and Iqbal?

double standards.

All I see is disgisting rhetoric by PTI supporters rather than a constructive debate. You're own leader is accused of countless things.

I would rather have someone who drinks alcohol than someone who is going to surrender to the murderers of countless thousands.



AstanoshKhan said:


> @ Moha 19
> 
> No one is playing cheap here. The real question is why Musharraf himself is using the Religion Card to deceive the masses but on other hand he promotes Roshan Khayali? Refer to my post no 60 please.




And why is Imran Khan hiding behind a veil of JUSTICE. 

WHERE IS THE JUSTICE FOR 35k PAKISTANIS. Just answer this simple question.


----------



## Leader

innocentboy said:


> What if IK and Mush join hands together??? as IK said he is ready to make coalition with ANY one except______.


 


innocentboy said:


> What if IK and Mush join hands together??? as IK said he is ready to make coalition with ANY one except______.


 
well for that musharraf would first need to come to Pakistan, find his party members, ask pardon for the crimes he committed, declare his assets, face charges of crimes he committed, face trial, and get hanged for the murderers of political leaders and citizens, if survived, then he would be required to come to PTI and ask for coalition.... then PTI executive committee will consider his application...

by the way, PTI has already stated "no compromise on objectives"

we will consider his application for coalition after that...


----------



## z9-ec

Aeronaut said:


> Specify your claims and back it up with valid arguments which must reflect his past record.



I have already. His diplomatic credentials are self explanatory relations with countries from Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Turkey and countless others improved during his tenure.

How is that not enough proof?

NOT EVEN KSA WILL SUPPORT IK! in his quest to surrender to the extremists.




> A dictator is one big threat to this country's survival - ie Adolf hitler who came into power through ballet.



HOW CAN YOU CALL SOMEONE WHO GAVE YOU THE RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH A DICTATOR?


> btw well ? i think he destroyed this country from within , from Pashtuns to Baloch all are turning against Pakistan just because of the ruthless "you wont know what hit you" policies -- you call it international stature - one has to be out of his mind to believe you.



Imran Khan repudiates tribal traditions that are inhumane and against human rights. It's disgusting.

The tribals you speak of reject Pakistan in totality. They do not respect our laws, culture, constitution. They harbour fugitives that are most wanted men in the Pakistan if not the world. 

We built schools, hospitals, roads and etc. Those radical tribal leaders blew them up on the basis of not being in their interests.

What will IK do? surrender to these fanatic lunatics running the tribal areas? let the anarchist take over?

Make no mistake Pakistan's law and rights are for everyone not only for the people in urban areas. They reject our way of life. Not acceptable.



> Bring the statics ! im waiting.



GO LOOK FOR THEM ON IMF, ADB, WB and other sources available.

Only people with mental instability or vision disorders would deny it.




> Yet Musharraf created more and more enemies ! Angered balochs , Pashtuns , attacked a Mosque ! - you call that "creating friends" ? i disagree and rather call it absolute lunacy.



WHAT ABOUT THE 35,000 PAKISTANIS KILLED BY THESE LUNATICS! 

How is surrendering to criminals JUSTICE!!??




> Yet he never refused aid  - Pakistan is in this mess because of his mind boggling policies regarding war on terror - his decisions have cost us 60 plus billion dollars so far in economic loss.



Good lord, utterly disgusting. 

HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN ABOTTABAD?

Not even a mentally instable patient would deny the existence of god knows how many MURDERERS in those tribal areas. I fully support force against the monsterous scumbags hiding there.

Why are you soo worried about what WoT cost us. WHY DO YOU NOT QUESTION WHAT THE TALIBANS AND AQ COST US!!!




> Imran is not preaching "surrender" to terrorists - he is rather preaching the path of "debate , reconciliation & negotiations" - your cheap shot at Imran has just back fired !



What Imran Khan is preaching equates to surrender. No other way to look at it.

Unless, you consider dialogue with criminals as just cause. Ridiculous.



> Do you think we already are not isolated ? My God i am starting to have doubts in your sanity ! -- Holland pulled out of Afghanistan years ago are they Isolated ? NO they have actually survived the global economic crunch by ending their policy over WOT & now everyone else in EU is paying the price for their stupidity.



Bhai sahab, YOU HAVE NO IDEA what isolation is. Ask the people who witnessed post 98 PAKISTAN.

Ask the North Koreans.






> Elaborate more & back your claims with valid proofs which can be verified in recent history -- mindless dogmas are not accepted.



YOU HAVE BEEN SERVED.




> How do you know that his party members are unaware of his policies over WOT if so why his party members join him in Dharnas ?



Pleaseee! I'm dieing to know how Imran Khan plans to deal with radicals and extremists. By surrendering to criminals?





> you are just making yourself look like a fool.



Who are you to judge me? history will judge us.

Only cowards who surrender to oppressive and suppression.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## z9-ec

Leader said:


> well for that musharraf would first need to come to Pakistan, find his party members, ask pardon for the crimes he committed, declare his assets, face charges of crimes he committed, face trial, and get hanged for the murderers of political leaders and citizens, if survived, then he would be required to come to PTI and ask for coalition.... then PTI executive committee will consider his application...
> 
> by the way, PTI has already stated "no compromise on objectives"
> 
> we will consider his application for coalition after that...


 
Funny this coming from a supporter of IMRAN KHAN who wants to SURRENDER to the MURDERERS of 35,000 PAKISTANIS.

Wheres the justice for those innocent civilians?


----------



## z9-ec

Aeronaut said:


> How is all that relevant to what i said ? - Democracy is a threat to Pakistan -- yes to delusional dictatorial morons like you.


 

Question, Which era was more democratic? todays Pakistan or during Musharraf's tenure?

Have you forgotten local governments? Todays PAKISTAN = dictatorship.


----------



## AstanoshKhan

moha199 said:


> ok seriously i seriously expected PTI supporters a little different from pmln/ppp supporters. Who the fk say he drink alcohol seems like he has been drinking with your elders isn't it? or with your? or you have seen him yourself? WTF what a cheap comments are we getting on this forum? Prove me one place Musharraf where he is drinking? i can be saying that Imran khan still drinks with his sisters along with benazir and zardari? but does it support my cheap comment? answer is no! now grow up on this kind of moronic statements bro. Wanna talk about politics then talk about it. Fact is that when you have no argument you will go on personality! We have nailed all who were against Musharraf on every step way back now new comments like you are just jumping the guns with no knowledge of history. let me also say that this forum used to keep some information which it doesn't. it's more like yahoo chat room, You will never see APML member or supporter to come up and say that imran is this or that we all say that support Musharraf or Imran or any who is not tested but don't support PMLN and PPP who are tested and failed. We believe that Musharraf is tested and successful, you think that Imran khan is better but it doesn't give you a right to call names to a person who has given 50 years of his and his family life to Pakistan, who has faced bullets tanks and aerial bombardment and who was and still is ready to give his life for this nation. Unlike Zardari nawaz who had just delivered some emotional speeches and nothing else. Now imran khan is not a bad guy but i personally like Musharraf but it doesn't mean that who doesn't vote imran khan is traitor or anyone who is standing against PTI in elections is traitor. WTF is wrong with this nation man. instead of joining hands with people who had been loyal to Pakistan and who had led country to prosperity, you guys just wanna pick on them not corrupt nawaz and zardari???? fine Musharraf was a dictator and now he isn't! he is coming as political leader who will be seeking votes! just like imran zardari or nawaz. Show some respect to elders secondly. This is exactly PMLN and PPP want. devision in newer parties so they gain and this is exactly what is happening. It's time to say that lets be realistic and support PAKISTAN FIRST not PTI first imran first or Musharraf first. it's PAKISTAN FIRST. APML members or supporters know that it is impossible for any party to win election as whole and we will be needing alliances and we will pick PTI and MQM but i guess some people still live in fools paradise who say they will mark elections as whole!


 
Why is it so hard for you to understand what I'm trying to make it through your brain. Okay, Imran may be adulterer, he may be an alcohol consumer, he may be committing any sin which is against the teaching of Islam, but Imran has never used religion or Islam in his speeches specifically to appease the masses and in conjuring them to support his party. What could be said if the very fabric of the party has a word 'Muslim' in it but the leader is no where Islamic. I call it hypocrisy and deception, and you are allowed to disagree with me.

Moha, it looks like you don't know anything about Musharraf. One of my closest was a security guard of Musharraf and I can tell you more about his personality and acts then even his wife would.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## naveed qaiser

When Musharraf came into power, Imran Khan was all sweet and sugar to him and Musharraf was a sugar-daddy of Imran Khan. Both shared many common traits and preferences and one of them was to have expensive and rare breed dogs. Musharrafs kennel was exemplary during his era, and now he breeds few of them in his London residence. During those times, Imran used to spend quite a time with Musharraf in Chak Shahzad farm house and his dogs. Both have a history of exchanging dogs in the past.
Now Musharraf has refreshed those memories again and has sent a puppy to Imran. The father of puppy is the favorite dog of Imran in the Musharrafs kennel. Humuyun Gohar, the mutual friend of Musharraf and Imran has been the courier. Imran is already getting his love restored for pro-establishment parties like MQM, and he has asked his PTI people in UK and USA to not to speak against Musharraf. It seems that the establishments dream of making Imran premier and Musharraf president is still alive, and this puppy could bring good luck to Imran.


----------



## z9-ec

AstanoshKhan said:


> Why is it so hard for you to understand what I'm trying to make it through your brain. Okay, Imran may be adulterer, he may be an alcohol consumer, he may be committing any sin which is against the teaching of Islam, but Imran has never used religion or Islam in his speeches specifically to appease the masses and in conjuring them to support his party. What could be said if the very fabric of the party has a word 'Muslim' in it but the leader is no where Islamic. I call it hypocrisy and deception, and you are allowed to disagree with me.



So what you mean is, anyone who uses the word "MUSLIM" is using religion as a veil? 

This is hypocrisy.


----------



## Leader

z9-ec said:


> Funny this coming from a supporter of IMRAN KHAN who wants to SURRENDER to the MURDERERS of 35,000 PAKISTANIS.
> 
> Wheres the justice for those innocent civilians?


 
____________________________________________ 



(the other way around of saying plain ignorance  )

come up with some argument or stop wasting your and ours time.


----------



## Karachiite

I used to respect Imran Khan but he is like a clean shaved taliban. Not to mention senior members from his party support Mumtaz Qadri and blasphemy law. His stance on taliban is too weak. He thinks we can negotiate with bearded animals who are read to blow themselves up at any minute. 

While Musharraf on the other hand did all the right things. Especially the economy. Under him a 7-8% gdp growth and so much foreign investment. I wish Musharraf stayed in power for atleast 6-8 more years.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AstanoshKhan

z9-ec said:


> Funny this coming from a supporter of IMRAN KHAN who wants to SURRENDER to the MURDERERS of 35,000 PAKISTANIS.
> 
> Wheres the justice for those innocent civilians?



A brief history of Drone attacks.

Year/no. of attacks
2004/1
2005/2
2006/2
2007/4
2008/33
2009/53
2010/118
2011/19, and still continued

No. of Attacks: 232
Deaths: 2241

Attacks during Musharraf Govt: 9
Death: 112

Attacks during PPP Govt: 223
Deaths: 2129

Now tell me who signed a deal with the US of A on these drones attacks? I won't blame PPP Govt. for all this mess but Musharraf and all those 35,000 Pakistanis died only in retaliation of these drone attacks, so in a sense Musharraf is responsible for all of them too.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Leader

naveed qaiser said:


> When Musharraf came into power, *Imran Khan was all sweet and sugar to him and Musharraf was a sugar-daddy of Imran Khan.* Both shared many common traits and preferences and one of them was to have expensive and rare breed dogs. Musharraf&#8217;s kennel was exemplary during his era, and now he breeds few of them in his London residence. During those times,* Imran used to spend quite a time with Musharraf in Chak Shahzad farm house and his dogs. Both have a history of exchanging dogs in the past.*
> Now Musharraf has refreshed those memories again and has sent a puppy to Imran. The father of puppy is the favorite dog of Imran in the Musharraf&#8217;s kennel. Humuyun Gohar, the mutual friend of Musharraf and Imran has been the courier. Imran is already getting his love restored for pro-establishment parties like MQM, and he has asked his PTI people in UK and USA to not to speak against Musharraf. It seems that the establishment&#8217;s dream of making Imran premier and Musharraf president is still alive, and this puppy could bring good luck to Imran.


 
quite an epic story, 

Imran has apologized to Nation for supporting Musharraf, the military dictator, and he has said recently he wont repeat his mistakes. enough said !


----------



## AstanoshKhan

Karachiite said:


> *I used to respect Imran Khan but he is like a clean shaved taliban*. Not to mention senior members from his party support Mumtaz Qadri and blasphemy law. His stance on taliban is too weak. He thinks we can negotiate with bearded animals who are read to blow themselves up at any minute.
> 
> While Musharraf on the other hand did all the right things. Especially the economy. Under him a 7-8% gdp growth and so much foreign investment. I wish Musharraf stayed in power for atleast 6-8 more years.


 
Even Obama suggested to make Taliban into talks, so shall we call him a black nigger Taliban too?


----------



## Karachiite

AstanoshKhan said:


> Even Obama suggested to make Taliban into talks, so shall we call him a black nigger Taliban too?


 
Obama also loves drone attacks and is pressing Pakistan to kill terrorists and not support them.


----------



## Leader

Karachiite said:


> I used to respect Imran Khan but he is like a clean shaved taliban. Not to mention senior members from his party support Mumtaz Qadri and blasphemy law. His stance on taliban is too weak. *He thinks we can negotiate with bearded animals* who are read to blow themselves up at any minute.
> 
> While Musharraf on the other hand did all the right things. Especially the economy. *Under him a 7-8% gdp growth and so much foreign investment. I wish Musharraf stayed in power for atleast 6-8 more years*.


 

no one is animal, everyone has a cause, and they think they are right like you think you are right... there is nothing wrong with coming to common terms, its a civilized way.

hate has no end, there is nothing wrong with blasphemy law...implementation is questionable, which is the case in all the judicial system of Pak.

to be respected you need to give respect...

we all know how that artificial bubble was created of so called growing economy...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aks18

i dont know why mushi's fan compare previous 1999 year with mushi's ruling years . remember pakistan was under heavy sanctions during nawaz era after 1998 nuclear tests , while mushi's progress was all a temporary bubble even world bank has reports on it ,, Shoukat Aziz ran pakistan like a bank and just because of poor economic policies economic system collapse with in a months , if mushi was that much hero he would have done much more in 9 years . i am not supporter of nawaz sharif but it is not fair to compare a tenure of 2 years with full of sanctions with 9 years tenure with americans aid and freedom from sanctions .


----------



## Frankenstein

I think what Imran Khan is good at is darna and dead line ,* jo garajte han who baraste nahi*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AstanoshKhan

Karachiite said:


> Obama also loves drone attacks and is pressing Pakistan to kill terrorists and not support them.


 
lol,

He loves drone attacks to happen only in Pakistan but on the other hand making truce with Taliban. He wants you to make them kill in Pakistan but on the other hand asking them to have dine with them in Afghanistan. If Obama's administration can do such things why can't we? or is it that we Pakistani loves the blood of others to be fled...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafael

Leader said:


> tenu gori kinay charhaya bhonsri key ?


 
Yar this is very un-called for. Kindly delete you post.


----------



## Leader

raheel1 said:


> Yar this is very un-called for. Kindly delete you post.


 
yar I heard its a song... look at the level of envy for PTI and IK by the Frankenstein poster...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafael

z9-ec said:


> Funny this coming from a supporter of IMRAN KHAN who wants to SURRENDER to the MURDERERS of 35,000 PAKISTANIS.
> 
> Wheres the justice for those innocent civilians?


 
You keep on harping the same tunes. Several members here have tried to explain you how he doesn't wants to surrender to the extremists but wants a strategy change. But you won't listen.

And while we are at it let me tell you something - If ever justice is served in Pakistan for all and sundry, trust me a lot of people including General Musharaff shall be executed for their crimes to this nation.


----------



## AstanoshKhan

Frankenstein said:


> I think what Imran Khan is good at is darna and dead line ,* jo garajte han who baraste nahi*



lol,

Do come from Canada to vote for Musharraf, as with 0% votes Musharraf may commits suicide and all his support comes from Pakistanis living in the west who are only good at e-support not on the ground.


----------



## U-571

z9-ec said:


> So what you mean is, anyone who uses the word "MUSLIM" is using religion as a veil?
> 
> This is hypocrisy.


 
hello mr zebra, go and tell you musharraf to appear in a better wig next time, atika audo is very unhppy for his current one and she is drinking in agony!!


----------



## Karachiite

AstanoshKhan said:


> lol,
> 
> Do come from Canada to vote for Musharraf, as with 0% votes Musharraf may commits suicide and all his support comes from Pakistanis living in the west who are only good at e-support not on the ground.


 
And majority of Imran Khan's support comes from kids who aren't even old enough to vote.


----------



## Leader

Karachiite said:


> And majority of Imran Khan's support comes from kids who aren't even old enough to vote.


 
wow thats great news, he is indeed respected and loved by three to four GENERATIONS of Pakistan as their role model......

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Karachiite

Ofcourse it's very easy to fool kids.


----------



## z9-ec

Leader said:


> (the other way around of saying plain ignorance  )




IF you think seeking JUSTICE for 35,000 PAKISTANIS MURDERED by LUNATICS is ignorance.

Then, god help Pakistan. We're on the path of utter destruction.


----------



## Leader

Karachiite said:


> Ofcourse it's very easy to fool kids.


 
and indeed its really foolish of 4 generations to be fooled by a single person... great achievement indeed.


----------



## Leader

z9-ec said:


> IF you think seeking JUSTICE for 35,000 PAKISTANIS MURDERED by LUNATICS is ignorance.
> 
> Then, god help Pakistan. We're on the path of utter destruction.


 
Allah will help Pakistan, you need not to worry about my homeland. and yes Lunatics have ran away to london, some more are coming soon....


----------



## Rafael

z9-ec said:


> IF you think seeking JUSTICE for 35,000 PAKISTANIS MURDERED by LUNATICS is ignorance.
> 
> Then, god help Pakistan. We're on the path of utter destruction.


 
While I have no issues with seeking justice for 35,000 killed but how about seeking justice for those who have been missing from Baluchistan during Musharaff's era? How about seeking justice for Mullah Zaeef who was handed over to Americans even though he was a diplomat of an independent country with a diplomatic passport? How about seeking justice for 180 million Pakistanis who did not give any right to the General and yet he ruled them for 10 years? 

Like I said, If ever the Justice is served in Pakistan for all and Sundry rest assured that Musharaff would be among the first lot to be executed for treachery.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## z9-ec

raheel1 said:


> While I have no issues with seeking justice for 35,000 killed but how about seeking justice for those who have been missing from Baluchistan during Musharaff's era? How about seeking justice for Mullah Zaeef who was handed over to Americans even though he was a diplomat of an independent country with a diplomatic passport? How about seeking justice for 180 million Pakistanis who did not give any right to the General and yet he ruled them for 10 years?
> 
> Like I said, If ever the Justice is served in Pakistan for all and Sundry rest assured that Musharaff would be among the first lot to be executed for treachery.



So would Imran Khan for his continuous support of extremists, criminals and radicals who are hell bent in destroying Pakistan. Fighting against the state and it's laws.

As fellow member Sir MastanKhan put it. If he were to be a citizen of India, US or any other country Imran Khan would have been jailed for treason.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

Leader said:


> Allah will help Pakistan, you need not to worry about my homeland. and yes Lunatics have ran away to london, some more are coming soon....


 
60 saal sey yehi sun rahay hain ALLAH HELP KERAIN GEY BILKUL ISI TERHAIN JIS TRHAN UNHO NEY OTTOMAN EMPIRE KI MADAD KI THI KUD YEAH BHOOL JATAIN HAI KEY ALLAH TO UN KA BHI HAI. AIK HI KUDHA HAI NA TO WO TUMARI MADAD KIUN KEREY SIRF ISLEY KEY HUM SIRF NAM KEY MUSLMAN HO  WHAT IS ISLAM HUH TRUST ME ITS MORE THEN JUST NAMAZ AND ROZA HER CHEESE MAIN ALLAH KO NA GHUSAYA KERO .APNEY HATH BHI ISTAMAL KERNA SECKO


----------



## Leader

z9-ec said:


> So would Imran Khan for his continuous support of extremists, criminals and radicals who are hell bent in destroying Pakistan. Fighting against the state and it's laws.
> 
> As fellow member Sir MastanKhan put it. If he were to be a citizen of India, US or any other country Imran Khan would have been jailed for treason.


 
well not every where jungle law prevails...


----------



## Rafael

z9-ec said:


> *So would Imran Khan for his continuous support of extremists*, criminals and radicals who are hell bent in destroying Pakistan. Fighting against the state and it's laws.
> 
> As fellow member Sir MastanKhan put it. If he were to be a citizen of India, US or any other country Imran Khan would have been jailed for treason.


 
LOL Whether Imran Khan supports terrorism is debatable at best. Nothing is proven, nor does he claims that he supports terrorists. Provide me with one video or source where it is evident that he supports terrorists. And no sir he would not have been hanged even in US, India or any other DEMOCRATIC country where you need to provide enough evidence to support your charges against other party. Their rulers ain't Musharaff and they are not Pakistan run by dictators.

The same cannot be said about Musharaff. His crimes are on record and for every body to see.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Leader

A.Muqeet khan said:


> 60 saal sey yehi sun rahay hain ALLAH HELP KERAIN GEY BILKUL ISI TERHAIN JIS TRHAN UNHO NEY OTTOMAN EMPIRE KI MADAD KI THI KUD YEAH BHOOL JATAIN HAI KEY ALLAH TO UN KA BHI HAI. AIK HI KUDHA HAI NA TO WO TUMARI MADAD KIUN KEREY SIRF ISLEY KEY HUM SIRF NAM KEY MUSLMAN HO  WHAT IS ISLAM HUH TRUST ME ITS MORE THEN JUST NAMAZ AND ROZA HER CHEESE MAIN ALLAH KO NA GHUSAYA KERO .APNEY HATH BHI ISTAMAL KERNA SECKO


 
there is a thing known as brain in the upper portion of your body, precisely known to be existing inside your skull... do use it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Last Hope

Handling foreign matters, Musharraf was greatest.





But Imran Khan is not doubt better than him.
Cheers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## z9-ec

raheel1 said:


> LOL Whether Imran Khan supports terrorism is debatable at best. Nothing is proven, nor does he claims that he supports terrorists. Provide me with one video or source where it is evident that he supports terrorists. And no sir he would not have been hanged even in US, India or any other DEMOCRATIC country where you need to provide enough evidence to support your charges against other party. Their rulers ain't Musharaff and they are not Pakistan run by dictators.
> 
> The same cannot be said about Musharaff. His crimes are on record and for every body to see.


 
Actions speak louder than words.

Never once has he protested against the killing of innocent Pakistanis being murdered by lunatics harbored by tribal leaders.

All he does is dharna against drones. BTW, drone deaths do not even come close 35k.

Why not a dharna at a MADRASA? WHY no dharnas against MULLAHS with sh1tloads of fatwas.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dance

z9-ec said:


> Why not a dharna at a MADRASA? WHY no dharnas against MULLAHS with sh1tloads of fatwas.


 
Well said. 

Honestly his last two dharnas have not yielded ANYTHING, drone attacks are still going on as they were before. It would be better if he picked something more necessary/realistic to protest against like religious intolerance, extremism, violent mullahs, corruption, cutbacks on education/health a.k.a things that actually affect most Pakistanis!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Leader

@ z9-ec

its not about giving dharna's for the sake of some fun, that he should start giving dharna on every thing, its about giving dharna to improve the conditions of the country...its against the root cause of all the problems that we face...that is WOT that mush brought into our country...

by the way, its musharraf and his some E-APML that wants to have a coalition with PTI.


----------



## Rafael

z9-ec said:


> Actions speak louder than words.
> 
> Never once has he protested against the killing of innocent Pakistanis being murdered by lunatics harbored by tribal leaders.
> 
> All he does is dharna against drones. BTW, drone death do not even come close 35k.
> 
> Why not a dharna at a MADRASA? WHY no dharnas against MULLAHS with sh1tloads of fatwas.


 
If you don't see it or If the media doesn't highlights it - doesn't means that it did not happen.


Associated Press Of Pakistan ( Pakistan&#039;s Premier NEWS Agency ) - Imran Khan condemns terrorist attack at GHQ

PTI condemns the terrorist attack on PNS Mehran :: News :: Support Imran Khan

ONLINE - International News Network

Imran Khan was the only politician who publicly condemned the killing of Salman Taseer and glorification of his killer. You can find that thread on this very forum.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Leader

and therefore, mindless critics of PTI says he is ISI supported... haha


----------



## z9-ec

Leader said:


> @ z9-ec
> 
> its not about giving dharna's for the sake of some fun, that he should start giving dharna on every thing, its about giving dharna to improve the conditions of the country...its against the root cause of all the problems that we face...that is WOT that mush brought into our country...



The biggest existential threat to Pakistan is extremism. Even you would agree. And, according to you it is not a worthy cause?

God god help us.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafael

Dance said:


> Well said.
> 
> Honestly his last two dharnas have not yielded ANYTHING, drone attacks are still going on as they were before. It would be better if he picked something more necessary/realistic to protest against like religious intolerance, extremism, violent mullahs, corruption, cutbacks on education/health a.k.a things that actually affect most Pakistanis!


 
Dear Sir, What makes you think that the Dharna didn't yield anything? These stunts are used to pressurise governments to change its policies. Did you even see how many people attended his Dharna in Peshawar? And then more so in Karachi?


----------



## z9-ec

raheel1 said:


> If you don't see it or If the media doesn't highlights it - doesn't means that it did not happen.
> 
> 
> Associated Press Of Pakistan ( Pakistan&#039;s Premier NEWS Agency ) - Imran Khan condemns terrorist attack at GHQ
> 
> PTI condemns the terrorist attack on PNS Mehran :: News :: Support Imran Khan
> 
> ONLINE - International News Network
> 
> Imran Khan was the only politician who publicly condemned the killing of Salman Taseer and glorification of his killer. You can find that thread on this very forum.


 

Codemning is one thing. On the other side, he seeks dialogue with criminals.

JUSTICE. that's what I'm talking about. JUSTICE for 35k PAKISTANIS. 

WHY IS HIS PARTY CALLED MOVEMENT FOR JUSTICE!!??


----------



## U-571

z9-ec said:


> Codemning is one thing. On the other side, he seeks dialogue with criminals.
> 
> JUSTICE. that's what I'm talking about. JUSTICE for 35k PAKISTANIS.
> 
> WHY IS HIS PARTY CALLED MOVEMENT FOR JUSTICE!!??


 
have you spoken to musharraf abt his funny stupid wig ??


----------



## S.M.R

Which LEADER has got the courage to face this badtameez Prabhoo Chawla....

Just watch his bad tamizi style (baseless) batoon say batain nikalna (no doubt he is expert) but how nicely answered by Musharraf:


























Please watch All Parts.


We need such leaders

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Leader

z9-ec said:


> The biggest existential threat to Pakistan is extremism. Even you would agree. And, according to you it is not a worthy cause?
> 
> God god help us.


 
WOT brought us to this situation... I hope you would realize it and that military operations has brought us nothing but more trouble.... the day amreeka would quit afghanistan the day army would be dealing with the very extremists.... then where will your fascist ideas will stand ? rather to be exact dont our army already support some good talibees?


----------



## U-571

z9-ec said:


> The biggest existential threat to Pakistan is extremism. Even you would agree. And, according to you it is not a worthy cause?
> 
> God god help us.


 
god help you...................., america is playing mind fuckk game with you and your bed buddy musharraf the hypocrite


----------



## U-571

innocentboy said:


> Which LEADER has got the courage to face this badtameez Prabhoo Chawla....
> 
> Just watch his bad tamizi style (baseless) batoon say batain nikalna (no doubt he is expert) but how nicely answered by Musharraf:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please watch All Parts.
> 
> 
> We need such leaders


 
but musharraf couldnt reply to american bat tamizi of 'do more' clauses


----------



## Dance

raheel1 said:


> Dear Sir, What makes you think that the Dharna didn't yield anything? These stunts are used to pressurise governments to change its policies. Did you even see how many people attended his Dharna in Peshawar? And then more so in Karachi?


 
Ma'am* 

I understand why he is doing the dharna. But seriously have the drone attacks stop? Has the government changed its polices? 
The answer is no

Things are exactly the same as they were. There are far more important things that should be changed and stopped in Pakistan because things like extremism/corruption/intolerance/lack of an education are a couple of the countless reasons Pakistan is in the mess its in. Those are a far greater threat to Pakistan than drone attacks in my opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Leader

raheel1 said:


> Dear Sir, What makes you think that the Dharna didn't yield anything? These stunts are used to pressurise governments to change its policies. Did you even see how many people attended his Dharna in Peshawar? And then more so in Karachi?


 
he lives in usa, so worth not mentioning what pakistan is to him...


----------



## z9-ec

Leader said:


> WOT brought us to this situation... I hope you would realize it and that military operations has brought us nothing but more trouble.... the day amreeka would quit afghanistan the day army would be dealing with the very extremists.... then where will your fascist ideas will stand ? rather to be exact dont our army already support some good talibees?


 
Please read my previous posts. 

No one in his right mind would deny the existence of 100s of madarasas preaching ridiculous version of Islam in Pakistan prior to 9/11. 


WHY DO YOU ONLY SEE WoT? WHY NOT WHAT AQ AND T COSTS PAKISTAN?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dance

Leader said:


> he lives in usa, so worth not mentioning what pakistan is to him...


 
You don't know anything about my life or me to make that judgement. 

Leave out the personal attacks and actually answer the post.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## S.M.R

raheel1 said:


> Dear Sir, What makes you think that the Dharna didn't yield anything? These stunts are used to pressurise governments to change its policies. Did you even see how many people attended his Dharna in Peshawar? And then more so in Karachi?


 
Dharna was nothing but a symbolic / useless / for political mileage. A dharna done in Peshawar and gave them sufficient time till karachi dharna, they easily managed the two days supplies but increasing the earlier ones.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Leader

z9-ec said:


> Please read my previous posts.
> 
> No one in his right mind would deny the existence of 100s of madarasas preaching ridiculous version of Islam in Pakistan prior to 9/11.
> 
> 
> WHY DO YOU ONLY SEE WoT? WHY NOT WHAT AQ AND T COSTS PAKISTAN?


 
yes that is exactly what Imran khan says, get out of WOT and deal the problem without external pressure. deal it in your own interest...

just dont be a mindless critic for no good reason... we all want to get out of this mess... the only difference is your fascist ideas are to terminate what you cannot even precisely identify, its outfall is far to be understood by your kind.


----------



## S.M.R

U-571 said:


> but musharraf couldnt reply to american bat tamizi of 'do more' clauses


 
Bcaz we are ally in WoT. Infact he tried his best to secure the Pak Afghan Border. Now you have kicked him out, enough honeymoon period for DeMoCrAtIc govt. ask it to stop doing more.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Leader

Dance said:


> You don't know anything about my life or me to make that judgement.
> 
> Leave out the personal attacks and actually answer the post.


 
I dont need to be personal with outsiders, it was with reference to your previous post, which shows how enlightened you are of the ground realities in my homeland.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## S.M.R

raheel1 said:


> If you don't see it or If the media doesn't highlights it - doesn't means that it did not happen.
> 
> 
> Associated Press Of Pakistan ( Pakistan&#039;s Premier NEWS Agency ) - Imran Khan condemns terrorist attack at GHQ
> 
> PTI condemns the terrorist attack on PNS Mehran :: News :: Support Imran Khan
> 
> ONLINE - International News Network
> 
> Imran Khan was the only politician who publicly condemned the killing of Salman Taseer and glorification of his killer. You can find that thread on this very forum.


 

Well, if condemnation is everything, then please Choose Altaf Hussain instead of IK

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## U-571

@z9-ec, musharraf is asking what are you doing to night

if you are not busy, go to his place, he said


----------



## z9-ec

U-571 said:


> @z9-ec, musharraf is asking


 
Not even worthy of a response.


----------



## S.M.R

U-571 said:


> @z9-ec, musharraf is asking what are you doing to night
> 
> if you are not busy, go to his place, he said


 
What do you mean


----------



## U-571

z9-ec said:


> Not even worthy of a response.


 
he s also sayin bring some supplies too, he wanna get extra protective


----------



## Dance

Leader said:


> I dont need to be personal with outsiders, it was with reference to your previous post, which shows how enlightened you are of the ground realities in my homeland.


 
Lol what a joke you are. 

Obviously you don't know the ground realties and cannot answer the questions I pose, which is why you are resorting to personal attacks. You're just ruining your parties image, your loss


----------



## Dance

innocentboy said:


> What do you mean


 


z9-ec said:


> Not even worthy of a response.


 
I love how these people are restoring to personal/cheap attacks instead of arguing constructively. Is this what PTI is really about?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## S.M.R

Watch this:






Sub Titles:

IERS MORGAN: Pakistan is one of the United States most crucial allies in the war on terror. But now there are tough questions on both sides about that relationship. Joining me now, the one time, perhaps future president of Pakistan, General Pervez Musharraf. Mr. President, thank you for joining me.

PERVEZ MUSHARRAF, FORMER PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN: Thank you.

MORGAN: Quite clearly, there is a problem in the relationship between America and Pakistan right now. A lot of it centers around the discovery that Osama bin Laden was living right in the middle of what appeared to be a intelligence compound for all this time. How would you describe the relationship as it stands?

MUSHARRAF: There certainly is a trust deficit, but it has been persisting since the last one year. Not because of OBL alone  Osama alone. There were incidents of mistrust in the past. Therefore, the final culmination was this, that there was total mistrust, and therefore Pakistan was not even told. And as people take it, there was a violation of Pakistans sovereignty. Therefore, it has led to a lot of more misunderstanding. I think  which is extremely detrimental to the cause of fighting against terror.

MORGAN: I mean, theres no doubt that most world leaders now say that Pakistan has become the center for world terror. Do you accept that?

MUSHARRAF: To an extent, yes. But the real fight is in Afghanistan. If we can win in Afghanistan, we will win in Pakistan also. It is not vice versa. If we win in Pakistan, Afghanistan still stays.

So I dont believe that. There is no doubt that the situation in Pakistan is more complicated, in that there is al Qaeda, there is Taliban. And Taliban spreading Talibanization into settled district. And then theres extremists in our society.

And then there are Mujahadeen who are involved with Kashmir in India, all of them developing a nexus. So the situation is more complicated in Pakistan, all right.

MORGAN: Is it  but there is obvious frustration and concern in America, not least because, of course, Was Pakistan has a reputed  at least 100 nuclear weapons. If the country continues to deteriorate in terms of stability, this becomes a very dangerous situation for the world.

MUSHARRAF: If Pakistan disintegrates, then it can be dangerous. Otherwise, if Pakistans integrity is there, and which Im sure it will be there as long as the armed forces of Pakistan are there, there is no danger of the nuclear assets or strategic assets falling in any terrorist hands.

MORGAN: We talked about disintegration, it is all relative, isnt it? I mean, 35,000 Pakistani people have been killed in terror related incidents since 9/11. There are suicide bombings every week now in Pakistan. To a neutral observer, it does appear that you country, Pakistan, is going through a form of disintegration.

MUSHARRAF: I wouldnt call it disintegration. As I said, the armed forces of Pakistan keep the unity and the  and the four provinces of Pakistan certainly are not looking for separation. But, therefore, theres no doubt in my mind that disintegration will not be possible.

And therefore, any  outside world, I would like to say also  understands that disintegration of Pakistan already harmed the integrity of Pakistan, will really be extremely dangerous for  for the world  for the region and world.

MORGAN: You understand why President Obama and his administration feel pretty angry when they discover that the most wanted terrorist in American history is living right in the heart of Pakistan, right next to a military base? I mean, it defies credibility. Im not saying that you knew anything, but certainly that nobody at any high level in Pakistan had any idea that Osama bin Laden was there.

MUSHARRAF: I dont think anyone had an idea. I dont think so.

MORGAN: You worked  you worked in that compound. You worked in the base, next to the compound in Abbottabad for two and a half years.

MUSHARRAF: Yes.

MORGAN: Is it credible that no one else in that base, in all this time, would have had any idea?

MUSHARRAF: Well, thats a very  when you say I worked there  no, I was trained there. I was a cadet when I got in the army.

MORGAN: That means you know it very well.

MUSHARRAF: Yeah.

MORGAN: You know where that house is. You know the proximity.

MUSHARRAF: Yes.

MORGAN: Im not suggesting that you knew for a moment. What Im suggesting is does it seem likely to you, with all these military intelligence people around this compound, that nobody knew anything?

MUSHARRAF: Theres normal. All the military intelligence people, there must have been a detachment, headed by a major or a lieutenant colonel and a few people, about eight ten, people. That is the detachment anywhere, all over Pakistan.

It is not that there was swarming with intelligence people around. Not at all. And the  the issue  yes, indeed. It is a terrible mishap. Its a terrible failure. But to think that there was complicity at the strategic level, at the government level, is  is certainly not there.

The people around, thousands of them living around this house, they also didnt know that Osama bin Laden is inside. So I really  I have certain reservations on this issue, whether he was there for five years. I cant imagine that.

But if we were there, well, again, it was a great failure, failure of the intelligence detachments over there who should have known.

MORGAN: Hold that thought, Mr. President. Coming up, more on the relationship between the U.S. and Pakistan.


MORGAN: Back now with General Pervez Musharraf, the former president of Pakistan. If you had been the president of Pakistan when this raid took place, would you have been entirely comfortable with what the Americans did, in terms of dropping Navy SEALS into the compound, killing Osama bin Laden on the sovereign soil, not telling anybody in the Pakistani government? Would you have been happy about that?

MUSHARRAF: No, not at all. Not at all. Not the least. In fact, in my time, it was very, very clear that we dont want anybody to intrude across cross borders, no force. We decided on intelligence cooperation. All the dozens of al Qaeda people that we got, all the important ones, were intelligence cooperation. Locate them, identify them.

But the action was invariably by Pakistan forces. Never did any outside 

MORGAN: How would you have reacted if you had been Pakistans president?

MUSHARRAF: Well, I would have certainly reacted, very angrily. This is a violation of our sovereignty.

MORGAN: Is it, therefore, illegal what the Americans did?

MUSHARRAF: It is absolutely illegal, yes.

MORGAN: So it was an unlawful assassination?

MUSHARRAF: Now you are getting into the legality of  he was a world class risk. He has caused 

MORGAN: Im referring to the mission itself. If, as you say, it was an illegal raid on sovereign territory, therefore it becomes an illegal, unlawful assassination. It cant be anything else.

MUSHARRAF: Well, I think that  I  I dont want to get involved in these legalities of the issue.

MORGAN: You did say  thats why I asked you if you thought it was illegal. If it is illegal, then the killing of bin Laden becomes an unlawful assassination.

MUSHARRAF:  killing. I will agree.

So what would you have done if you had been president? You have this unlawful assassination, as you see it, on your sovereign soil. What could Pakistan  what should Pakistan have done?

MUSHARRAF: Well, I dont think I would have looked at it from international law point of view or legalities or jurisprudence points of view. Here is a terrorist who needed to be death with. Theres no doubt he should have been dealt with.

The modality used was wrong. It should have been Pakistan forces to deal with it. U.S. forces violated our sovereignty. And certainly it would have  it would certainly have brought a very bad name. My reputation within my own people would have gone down.

Therefore, any leader in Pakistan allowing this  his own reputation is at stake, and rightly so. Therefore, I would have  wouldnt have liked it, objected. But I would not have objected to the killing of Osama bin Laden, whether it was violation of any law or 

MORGAN: What you would have liked is the American administration to have informed you.

MUSHARRAF: Yes.

MORGAN: And possibly included Pakistani forces in the raid. Is that what you are saying?

MUSHARRAF: No. I would have certainly insisted that it be Pakistans special forces going to deal with it.

MORGAN: Here is the problem. You are President Obama; you know there has been a breakdown in trust between Pakistan and America at a high level. The trust is not what it used to be. There are good reasons for that.

You get intelligence that Osama bin Laden is in this compound. And you have to make a choice: either we tell the authorities, the government of a country that currently we do not trust, and who we may think  we may suspect know that Osama bin Laden is there, that some of them knew this.

Why, if you are President Obama, could you possibly take the risk under those circumstances of not acting unilaterally?

MUSHARRAF: Well, no Pakistani and no leader in Pakistan will allow this as a justification for any intrusion into Pakistan. Nobody can do that. No countrys leader  would America allow such an action by Mexico or somebody? I mean, lets treat all countries with sovereign equality.

MORGAN: President Obama said this week on British television for his state visit to Britain that if the same event arose again, he would do the same. If it happens in the future with other known terrorists in al Qaeda, he would take the same action. We have a clear flash point between Pakistan and America.

MUSHARRAF: Yes. I think this is putting the Pakistan leadership and government on the dock. I think it is  it is not a very responsible statement.

MORGAN: You think it is irresponsible for President Obama to say that.

MUSHARRAF: Yes, indeed.

MORGAN: Because it basically implies that America has rights in terms of taking action on this sovereign soil, as in Pakistan, we saw with bin Laden, that it has a right to deal do that, when you say it has no right to do that.

MUSHARRAF: Certainly no country has a right to intrude into any other country. Actually  I mean, if technically or legally you see it, it is an act of war. Therefore, I think it is an irresponsible statement. And I think such arrogance should not be shown publicly to the world.

MORGAN: You think he was arrogant?

MUSHARRAF: I think so. I think it is arrogance that we dont care. We dont care for your national opinion. We dont care for your people. We will come in and do the same thing. This is  this is arrogance.

MORGAN: When you say an act of war, thats pretty serious language. Would you see another raid by the Americans to get rid of another al Qaeda terrorist in exactly the same circumstances, without informing the Pakistani government  would that be an act of war?

MUSHARRAF: Theoretically, technically, yes, indeed. It is an act of war. Any violation by forces of a countrys sovereignty is an act of war, theoretically. Now how to deal with it is the question. I leave it to the government there how they want to deal with it, diplomatically, through dealing, through protests, or through physical military action and military response.

It could be a serious situation. We must all understand that. The world should understand it. President Obama should understand it.

MORGAN: We will take a short break now. When we come back, I want to talk about your political future and the rumors that you may well launch a new bid to become president again of Pakistan.



MORGAN: Back now with General Perez Musharraf, the former president of Pakistan.

Mr. President, there is a growing clamor in Pakistan for you to possibly return in the next election in 2013. Will you consider doing that?

MUSHARRAF: Yes, I have already taken a decision. I did consider the situation in Pakistan. And I saw that there is a requirement of creating another political option. Otherwise, Pakistan is going in the wrong direction.

Therefore, I have made my  formed my own party. And I do intend absolutely to return to Pakistan. I have set the date of 23rd March, 2012, well before the election in 2013. I will.

MORGAN: Do you believe you can win?

MUSHARRAF: Well, I have entered into politics because I do believe I can win. As far as going back as president, thats an issue. Weve got a parliamentary form of government. The party has to win. And then if my party wins and has a majority, then one has to decide whether one becomes a prime minister or a president.

MORGAN: Youve been in this interview quite outspoken about President Obama, called him arrogant, in terms of what happened in the raid on bin Laden. You say it would be an act of war if it happens again. In fact, it already has been.

If you become president, you will know that Pakistan is very reliant at the moment on American aid. Three billion dollars a year is a lot of money. Are you worried that if you ramp up the rhetoric over the search for the terrorists in Pakistan against the Americans, they might respond and say, were yanking our money?

MUSHARRAF: Well, first of all, I didnt say act of war. Yes, technically and theoretically, it is. Any intrusion  I was talking theoretically  it is an act of war. Anybody intruding with force in any other country is an act of war, theoretically.

But I didnt say that one would like to declare it as an act of war. I think it has very serious repercussions.

MORGAN: The point I was making is obviously, if you create to much of a rift with America, with President Obama, if you go back into power, they wont forget that. And Pakistan is reliant on this aid money. Its a lot of money every year.

MUSHARRAF: Money is coming. It is there. It assists Pakistan. Theres no doubt about that. But that doesnt mean that Pakistan can give up its sovereignty, its national interests.

Now this has to be dealt with in a diplomatic manner. We have to reduce this trust deficit. We have to restore trust. It was there for six or seven years when I was there. We had good trust. And we were taking action. And we were very frank and straight and direct.

MORGAN: Have you always personally been 100 percent honest with America?

:MUSHARRAF: Five hundred percent honest. I dont believe in dishonesty. I believe in telling a person right straight, because then that is how trust is developed. The moment you are hiding or telling  distorting facts, that is when the trust deficit starts.

MORGAN: Do you believe the current Pakistani administration has been 100% honest?

MUSHARRAF: I dont know. I dont know. I cant comment on that. Certainly, the mistrust is that Pakistan army or the ISI assists the Taliban. And the bone of contention lies in North Waziristan not being attacked and Afghani, who is one of the leaders of this Taliban is not being dealt with.

Now, I dont know what discussions take place. But if I was there, I would certainly  there has to be a reason why it is not being done, a strategic reason, or maybe it will be done a little later. But whatever it is, the concerns of the United States and the coalition must be given straight and clearly through the United States.

What is the reason that this is not happening? And they must devolve whatever concerns of Pakistan is, absolutely, directly. That is what diplomacy is, really. And we must do that. We will  Pakistan I know will want to address this issue against al Qaeda and Taliban.

All that is happening. Isnt there a disconnect that while everyone accuses the ISI and the army that we are involved with the Taliban, and look at what they are doing. Look at what happened in this base, the naval base. And look at what has been happening all around.

But yet we are being blamed that we are with the Taliban. And the Taliban are doing this to the army. They have attacked our general headquarters. Isnt there some disconnect? Isnt there something wrong in this logic?

Obviously, there is something wrong in the logic. The problem is that theres maybe  maybe Im saying people are not talking straight and up front.

MORGAN: The problem in the logic comes when you discover that Osama bin Laden is in the middle of Pakistan, because clearly to the Americans, a lot of them will be thinking this is not a coincidence. Hes either been harbored there or somebody knew he was there. Otherwise it doesnt make any sense.

So I think the problem with the Taliban relationship with Pakistan is it becomes suspicious. MUSHARRAF: No, if this was the case, it doesnt stand with logic. If there was complicity, and hes there for five years, I get directly involved. That means I was complicit. I would like to give a logical 

MORGAN: Had you been president 

MUSHARRAF: Let me complete this. Now, if that was the case, I would like  I would have wanted to take leverage out of it. When I was at the receiving end in the 2007, I should have done something with this Osama bin Laden card and gained advantage.

So obviously it is illogical. It is not the case. May I also add 

MORGAN: You mean you would have traded the information that you had bin Laden?

MUSHARRAF: I would have done something to turn the tables in my favor.

MORGAN: You wouldnt have just handed him over to the Americans?

MUSHARRAF: I dont know.

MORGAN: Wouldnt that be the responsible thing to do?

MUSHARRAF: I would have used this card to my favor. That is what Im saying. I wouldnt have left it to the next government. You hand him over to the next government.

MORGAN: Can I just question the ethics of that for a moment? If youre a layman like me, and you say you would have used the existence of bin Laden in Pakistan to your advantage 

MUSHARRAF: You must understand my logic. Im saying if I was complicit, if I knew, I would have done that. If I was being analytical that I knew and Im harboring and hiding him, I would have done this maybe.

MORGAN: If you had known for a fact where bin Laden was, would you have handed him over to America?

MUSHARRAF: Lets not get into the details of something which didnt happen. Obviously 

MORGAN: Well, it might happen again. Thats why Im asking.

MUSHARRAF: I cant answer you right away. Its not a simple question/answer issue. Its a very serious issue.

MORGAN: Let me make it simple. Bin laden is dead. If you go back into power and you become president again, and you discover that a senior member of al Qaeda, who has without any doubt been committing atrocities, is living in another compound near Karachi or somewhere, would you tell the Americans? MUSHARRAF: I would like to take action. Why should I tell the Americans? However, there is intelligence cooperation. Even finding that man out, in my time, it was always  intelligence had always been cooperating.

Technical intelligence has  are more with the United States. So to locate a person, it was always been in ISI and CIA together.

So they would know already. And if they dont know, yes, indeed, I would like to inform them, but take action myself,

MORGAN: Mr. President, thank you very much indeed.

*** END OF INTERVIEW ***

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Frankenstein

AstanoshKhan said:


> lol,
> 
> Do come from Canada to vote for Musharraf, as with 0% votes Musharraf may commits suicide and all his support comes from Pakistanis living in the west who are only good at e-support not on the ground.


 
I am living in Pakistan, check my location flag properly


----------



## U-571

Dance said:


> I love how these people are restoring to personal/cheap attacks instead of arguing constructively. Is this what PTI is really about?


 
im not even a PTI guy so dont ask


----------



## Rafael

Dance said:


> Ma'am*
> 
> I understand why he is doing the dharna. But seriously have the drone attacks stop? Has the government changed its polices?
> The answer is no
> 
> Things are exactly the same as they were. There are far more important things that should be changed and stopped in Pakistan because things like extremism/corruption/intolerance/lack of an education are a couple of the countless reasons Pakistan is in the mess its in. Those are a far greater threat to Pakistan than drone attacks in my opinion.



Dear Ma'am,

If you were expecting that the drone attacks would stop by blocking the NATO lines for 2 days or the Govt. would bow down to the public pressure than I'm afraid you really underestimate PPP's skin. The Dharna in Peshawar and then Karachi is just the beginning. The momentum us building up and so is the pressure as PTI has announced the next Dharna in Multan, then in Lahore and finally in Islamabad. The effectiveness of the Dharnas is yet to be seen.

As for the real issues, Drone attacks fuel anger among the public and according to many reports people believe them to be responsible for spreading militancy. Here read this:

PressTV - Survey: Drone attacks in Pak fuel anger

And i need not tell you that the biggest problem Pakistan is facing right now is increasing militancy. Hope I have made myself clear.


----------



## Leader

Dance said:


> Lol what a joke you are.
> 
> Obviously you don't know the ground realties and cannot answer the questions I pose, which is why you are resorting to personal attacks. You're just ruining your parties image, your loss



I do understand your frustration...you need to come up with something useful to discuss...repeated speculations is not worthy, it shows pure envy..


----------



## z9-ec

Leader said:


> I do understand your frustration...you need to come up with something useful to discuss...repeated speculations is not worthy, it shows pure envy..


 
Repeat? what about Imran Khan's constant bickering on drones?

Drones BTW killed Ilyas Kashmiri and countless scumbags.




raheel1 said:


> Dear Ma'am,
> 
> If you were expecting that the drone attacks would stop by blocking the NATO lines for 2 days or the Govt. would bow down to the public pressure than I'm afraid you really underestimate PPP's skin. The Dharna in Peshawar and then Karachi is just the beginning. The momentum us building up and so is the pressure as PTI has announced the next Dharna in Multan, then in Lahore and finally in Islamabad. The effectiveness of the Dharnas is yet to be seen.



I'm waiting for PTIs dharna against a MADRASA or MULLAH.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Leader

z9-ec said:


> Repeatation? what about Imran Khan's constant bickering on drones?
> 
> Drones BTW killed Ilyas Kashmiri and countless scumbags.



use some common sense dude. 

ilyas kashmiri who infact should have been arrested by pakistan, trialed by pakistan, and executed by pakistan...

---------- Post added at 12:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:03 AM ----------

so maintain some self respect, I think is not asking too much from fascists, or is it ?


----------



## Peregrine

Musharraf had his chance and he blew it, now it's Imran's turn.


----------



## Leader

z9-ec said:


> I'm waiting for PTIs dharna against a MADRASA or MULLAH.


 
luckily PTI is not run by fascist minded people...


----------



## z9-ec

Leader said:


> luckily PTI is not run by fascist minded people...


 
Calling me a facist? would love to hear your views on Ilyas Kashmiri and other tribal lunatics. BTW, Imran Khan wants to gift them tribal areas and let those anarchist rule over sovereign land. Hypocrisy at best.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## S.M.R

raheel1 said:


> Dear Ma'am,
> 
> If you were expecting that the drone attacks would stop by blocking the NATO lines for 2 days or the Govt. would bow down to the public pressure than I'm afraid you really underestimate PPP's skin. The Dharna in Peshawar and then Karachi is just the beginning. The momentum us building up and so is the pressure as PTI has announced the next Dharna in Multan, then in Lahore and finally in Islamabad. The effectiveness of the Dharnas is yet to be seen.
> 
> As for the real issues, Drone attacks fuel anger among the public and according to many reports people believe them to be responsible for spreading militancy. Here read this:
> 
> PressTV - Survey: Drone attacks in Pak fuel anger
> 
> And i need not tell you that the biggest problem Pakistan is facing right now is increasing militancy. Hope I have made myself clear.


There is no doubt my friend that drones are creating nothing but an anger bcaz of innocent killings. 


Since PPP has been elected in elections for a period of 5 years, therefore it is representing 'Nation' (as one of PTI supporter said), and it is allowing drone attacks, not giving orders to PA to shot the drones down. Insted of dharnas IK should remain silent bcaz by dharnas they going agaisnt the will of nation. Right?

If dharnas were so useful then Jamaat e Islami would have been in the govt. No one is expert in dharnas like Jamaat e Islami.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## U-571

z9-ec said:


> Calling me a facist? would love to hear your views on Ilyas Kashmiri and other tribal lunatics. BTW, Imran Khan wants to gift them tribal areas and let those anarchist rule over sovereign land. Hypocrisy at best.


 
wow, how low you can go, the leader guy obviously pointing to the dictator ship of musharraf and that his pro americanism and NRO is leading the country into jeopardy, dude serious you dont make any sense

whatever ilyas kashmiri was, he was not a terrorist, he was fighting for his kashmiri cousins in kashmir

you are refering the guy who was all bad named because america killed him and bharat considered him terrorist, and he didnt do an aounce of damage to country to the guy who is all responsible for 400-500 drone attacks happened since and 35,000 pakistanis killed b/c of him


----------



## pak-marine

both of them are wrong musharaf (no matter how good) threw an elected govt sat as a dictator for 9 years , Imran khan wants to take us back to square one


----------



## z9-ec

U-571 said:


> wow, how low you can go, the leader guy obviously pointing to the dictator ship of musharraf and that his pro americanism and NRO is leading the country into jeopardy, dude serious you dont make any sense
> whatever ilyas kashmiri was, he was not a terrorist, he was fighting for his kashmiri cousins in kashmir



Who is accused of being behind PNS Mehran? is PNS mehran in kashmir? FFS.


----------



## Donatello

Imran Khan can never control the entire country. Because his party is too small for that. There will always be one party or another in control of some part of Pakistan. In USA these bastards have two parties, so when one loses, the other still gets a large share.

In Pakistan there are so many parties, i mean look how powerful the MQM and PML(N) are even though the head of state and head of government are from PPP.


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

z9-ec said:


> Who is accused of being behind PNS Mehran? is PNS mehran in kashmir? FFS.


 
look yar the point is that people see what they want to see that is they dont have the mind nor the unnecessary brains to look beyond their self created walls and we my dear freind are the same very people so let people talk


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

Leader said:


> there is a thing known as brain in the upper portion of your body, precisely known to be existing inside your skull... do use it.


 
well how about u use ur brains and debate my comments with sanity instead of representing who greatly groomed u are


----------



## A.Muqeet khan

Dance said:


> You don't know anything about my life or me to make that judgement.
> 
> Leave out the personal attacks and actually answer the post.


 
if he could he wouldnt be out there getting personnel

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kompromat

innocentboy said:


> Watch this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sub Titles:
> 
> IERS MORGAN: Pakistan is one of the United States&#8217; most crucial allies in the war on terror. But now there are tough questions on both sides about that relationship. Joining me now, the one time, perhaps future president of Pakistan, General Pervez Musharraf. Mr. President, thank you for joining me.
> 
> PERVEZ MUSHARRAF, FORMER PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN: Thank you.
> 
> MORGAN: Quite clearly, there is a problem in the relationship between America and Pakistan right now. A lot of it centers around the discovery that Osama bin Laden was living right in the middle of what appeared to be a intelligence compound for all this time. How would you describe the relationship as it stands?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: There certainly is a trust deficit, but it has been persisting since the last one year. Not because of OBL alone &#8212; Osama alone. There were incidents of mistrust in the past. Therefore, the final culmination was this, that there was total mistrust, and therefore Pakistan was not even told. And as people take it, there was a violation of Pakistan&#8217;s sovereignty. Therefore, it has led to a lot of more misunderstanding. I think &#8212; which is extremely detrimental to the cause of fighting against terror.
> 
> MORGAN: I mean, there&#8217;s no doubt that most world leaders now say that Pakistan has become the center for world terror. Do you accept that?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: To an extent, yes. But the real fight is in Afghanistan. If we can win in Afghanistan, we will win in Pakistan also. It is not vice versa. If we win in Pakistan, Afghanistan still stays.
> 
> So I don&#8217;t believe that. There is no doubt that the situation in Pakistan is more complicated, in that there is al Qaeda, there is Taliban. And Taliban spreading Talibanization into settled district. And then there&#8217;s extremists in our society.
> 
> And then there are Mujahadeen who are involved with Kashmir in India, all of them developing a nexus. So the situation is more complicated in Pakistan, all right.
> 
> MORGAN: Is it &#8212; but there is obvious frustration and concern in America, not least because, of course, Was Pakistan has a reputed &#8212; at least 100 nuclear weapons. If the country continues to deteriorate in terms of stability, this becomes a very dangerous situation for the world.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: If Pakistan disintegrates, then it can be dangerous. Otherwise, if Pakistan&#8217;s integrity is there, and which I&#8217;m sure it will be there as long as the armed forces of Pakistan are there, there is no danger of the nuclear assets or strategic assets falling in any terrorist hands.
> 
> MORGAN: We talked about disintegration, it is all relative, isn&#8217;t it? I mean, 35,000 Pakistani people have been killed in terror related incidents since 9/11. There are suicide bombings every week now in Pakistan. To a neutral observer, it does appear that you country, Pakistan, is going through a form of disintegration.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: I wouldn&#8217;t call it disintegration. As I said, the armed forces of Pakistan keep the unity and the &#8212; and the four provinces of Pakistan certainly are not looking for separation. But, therefore, there&#8217;s no doubt in my mind that disintegration will not be possible.
> 
> And therefore, any &#8212; outside world, I would like to say also &#8212; understands that disintegration of Pakistan already harmed the integrity of Pakistan, will really be extremely dangerous for &#8212; for the world &#8212; for the region and world.
> 
> MORGAN: You understand why President Obama and his administration feel pretty angry when they discover that the most wanted terrorist in American history is living right in the heart of Pakistan, right next to a military base? I mean, it defies credibility. I&#8217;m not saying that you knew anything, but certainly that nobody at any high level in Pakistan had any idea that Osama bin Laden was there.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: I don&#8217;t think anyone had an idea. I don&#8217;t think so.
> 
> MORGAN: You worked &#8212; you worked in that compound. You worked in the base, next to the compound in Abbottabad for two and a half years.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Yes.
> 
> MORGAN: Is it credible that no one else in that base, in all this time, would have had any idea?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Well, that&#8217;s a very &#8212; when you say I worked there &#8212; no, I was trained there. I was a cadet when I got in the army.
> 
> MORGAN: That means you know it very well.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Yeah.
> 
> MORGAN: You know where that house is. You know the proximity.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Yes.
> 
> MORGAN: I&#8217;m not suggesting that you knew for a moment. What I&#8217;m suggesting is does it seem likely to you, with all these military intelligence people around this compound, that nobody knew anything?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: There&#8217;s normal. All the military intelligence people, there must have been a detachment, headed by a major or a lieutenant colonel and a few people, about eight ten, people. That is the detachment anywhere, all over Pakistan.
> 
> It is not that there was swarming with intelligence people around. Not at all. And the &#8212; the issue &#8212; yes, indeed. It is a terrible mishap. It&#8217;s a terrible failure. But to think that there was complicity at the strategic level, at the government level, is &#8212; is certainly not there.
> 
> The people around, thousands of them living around this house, they also didn&#8217;t know that Osama bin Laden is inside. So I really &#8212; I have certain reservations on this issue, whether he was there for five years. I can&#8217;t imagine that.
> 
> But if we were there, well, again, it was a great failure, failure of the intelligence detachments over there who should have known.
> 
> MORGAN: Hold that thought, Mr. President. Coming up, more on the relationship between the U.S. and Pakistan.
> 
> 
> MORGAN: Back now with General Pervez Musharraf, the former president of Pakistan. If you had been the president of Pakistan when this raid took place, would you have been entirely comfortable with what the Americans did, in terms of dropping Navy SEALS into the compound, killing Osama bin Laden on the sovereign soil, not telling anybody in the Pakistani government? Would you have been happy about that?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: No, not at all. Not at all. Not the least. In fact, in my time, it was very, very clear that we don&#8217;t want anybody to intrude across cross borders, no force. We decided on intelligence cooperation. All the dozens of al Qaeda people that we got, all the important ones, were intelligence cooperation. Locate them, identify them.
> 
> But the action was invariably by Pakistan forces. Never did any outside &#8211;
> 
> MORGAN: How would you have reacted if you had been Pakistan&#8217;s president?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Well, I would have certainly reacted, very angrily. This is a violation of our sovereignty.
> 
> MORGAN: Is it, therefore, illegal what the Americans did?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: It is absolutely illegal, yes.
> 
> MORGAN: So it was an unlawful assassination?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Now you are getting into the legality of &#8212; he was a world class risk. He has caused &#8211;
> 
> MORGAN: I&#8217;m referring to the mission itself. If, as you say, it was an illegal raid on sovereign territory, therefore it becomes an illegal, unlawful assassination. It can&#8217;t be anything else.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Well, I think that &#8212; I &#8212; I don&#8217;t want to get involved in these legalities of the issue.
> 
> MORGAN: You did say &#8212; that&#8217;s why I asked you if you thought it was illegal. If it is illegal, then the killing of bin Laden becomes an unlawful assassination.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: &#8212; killing. I will agree.
> 
> So what would you have done if you had been president? You have this unlawful assassination, as you see it, on your sovereign soil. What could Pakistan &#8212; what should Pakistan have done?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Well, I don&#8217;t think I would have looked at it from international law point of view or legalities or jurisprudence points of view. Here is a terrorist who needed to be death with. There&#8217;s no doubt he should have been dealt with.
> 
> The modality used was wrong. It should have been Pakistan forces to deal with it. U.S. forces violated our sovereignty. And certainly it would have &#8212; it would certainly have brought a very bad name. My reputation within my own people would have gone down.
> 
> Therefore, any leader in Pakistan allowing this &#8212; his own reputation is at stake, and rightly so. Therefore, I would have &#8212; wouldn&#8217;t have liked it, objected. But I would not have objected to the killing of Osama bin Laden, whether it was violation of any law or &#8211;
> 
> MORGAN: What you would have liked is the American administration to have informed you.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Yes.
> 
> MORGAN: And possibly included Pakistani forces in the raid. Is that what you are saying?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: No. I would have certainly insisted that it be Pakistan&#8217;s special forces going to deal with it.
> 
> MORGAN: Here is the problem. You are President Obama; you know there has been a breakdown in trust between Pakistan and America at a high level. The trust is not what it used to be. There are good reasons for that.
> 
> You get intelligence that Osama bin Laden is in this compound. And you have to make a choice: either we tell the authorities, the government of a country that currently we do not trust, and who we may think &#8212; we may suspect know that Osama bin Laden is there, that some of them knew this.
> 
> Why, if you are President Obama, could you possibly take the risk under those circumstances of not acting unilaterally?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Well, no Pakistani and no leader in Pakistan will allow this as a justification for any intrusion into Pakistan. Nobody can do that. No country&#8217;s leader &#8212; would America allow such an action by Mexico or somebody? I mean, let&#8217;s treat all countries with sovereign equality.
> 
> MORGAN: President Obama said this week on British television for his state visit to Britain that if the same event arose again, he would do the same. If it happens in the future with other known terrorists in al Qaeda, he would take the same action. We have a clear flash point between Pakistan and America.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Yes. I think this is putting the Pakistan leadership and government on the dock. I think it is &#8212; it is not a very responsible statement.
> 
> MORGAN: You think it is irresponsible for President Obama to say that.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Yes, indeed.
> 
> MORGAN: Because it basically implies that America has rights in terms of taking action on this sovereign soil, as in Pakistan, we saw with bin Laden, that it has a right to deal do that, when you say it has no right to do that.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Certainly no country has a right to intrude into any other country. Actually &#8212; I mean, if technically or legally you see it, it is an act of war. Therefore, I think it is an irresponsible statement. And I think such arrogance should not be shown publicly to the world.
> 
> MORGAN: You think he was arrogant?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: I think so. I think it is arrogance that we don&#8217;t care. We don&#8217;t care for your national opinion. We don&#8217;t care for your people. We will come in and do the same thing. This is &#8212; this is arrogance.
> 
> MORGAN: When you say an act of war, that&#8217;s pretty serious language. Would you see another raid by the Americans to get rid of another al Qaeda terrorist in exactly the same circumstances, without informing the Pakistani government &#8212; would that be an act of war?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Theoretically, technically, yes, indeed. It is an act of war. Any violation by forces of a country&#8217;s sovereignty is an act of war, theoretically. Now how to deal with it is the question. I leave it to the government there how they want to deal with it, diplomatically, through dealing, through protests, or through physical military action and military response.
> 
> It could be a serious situation. We must all understand that. The world should understand it. President Obama should understand it.
> 
> MORGAN: We will take a short break now. When we come back, I want to talk about your political future and the rumors that you may well launch a new bid to become president again of Pakistan.
> 
> 
> 
> MORGAN: Back now with General Perez Musharraf, the former president of Pakistan.
> 
> Mr. President, there is a growing clamor in Pakistan for you to possibly return in the next election in 2013. Will you consider doing that?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Yes, I have already taken a decision. I did consider the situation in Pakistan. And I saw that there is a requirement of creating another political option. Otherwise, Pakistan is going in the wrong direction.
> 
> Therefore, I have made my &#8212; formed my own party. And I do intend absolutely to return to Pakistan. I have set the date of 23rd March, 2012, well before the election in 2013. I will.
> 
> MORGAN: Do you believe you can win?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Well, I have entered into politics because I do believe I can win. As far as going back as president, that&#8217;s an issue. We&#8217;ve got a parliamentary form of government. The party has to win. And then if my party wins and has a majority, then one has to decide whether one becomes a prime minister or a president.
> 
> MORGAN: You&#8217;ve been in this interview quite outspoken about President Obama, called him arrogant, in terms of what happened in the raid on bin Laden. You say it would be an act of war if it happens again. In fact, it already has been.
> 
> If you become president, you will know that Pakistan is very reliant at the moment on American aid. Three billion dollars a year is a lot of money. Are you worried that if you ramp up the rhetoric over the search for the terrorists in Pakistan against the Americans, they might respond and say, we&#8217;re yanking our money?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Well, first of all, I didn&#8217;t say act of war. Yes, technically and theoretically, it is. Any intrusion &#8212; I was talking theoretically &#8212; it is an act of war. Anybody intruding with force in any other country is an act of war, theoretically.
> 
> But I didn&#8217;t say that one would like to declare it as an act of war. I think it has very serious repercussions.
> 
> MORGAN: The point I was making is obviously, if you create to much of a rift with America, with President Obama, if you go back into power, they won&#8217;t forget that. And Pakistan is reliant on this aid money. It&#8217;s a lot of money every year.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Money is coming. It is there. It assists Pakistan. There&#8217;s no doubt about that. But that doesn&#8217;t mean that Pakistan can give up its sovereignty, its national interests.
> 
> Now this has to be dealt with in a diplomatic manner. We have to reduce this trust deficit. We have to restore trust. It was there for six or seven years when I was there. We had good trust. And we were taking action. And we were very frank and straight and direct.
> 
> MORGAN: Have you always personally been 100 percent honest with America?
> 
> :MUSHARRAF: Five hundred percent honest. I don&#8217;t believe in dishonesty. I believe in telling a person right straight, because then that is how trust is developed. The moment you are hiding or telling &#8212; distorting facts, that is when the trust deficit starts.
> 
> MORGAN: Do you believe the current Pakistani administration has been 100% honest?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: I don&#8217;t know. I don&#8217;t know. I can&#8217;t comment on that. Certainly, the mistrust is that Pakistan army or the ISI assists the Taliban. And the bone of contention lies in North Waziristan not being attacked and Afghani, who is one of the leaders of this Taliban is not being dealt with.
> 
> Now, I don&#8217;t know what discussions take place. But if I was there, I would certainly &#8212; there has to be a reason why it is not being done, a strategic reason, or maybe it will be done a little later. But whatever it is, the concerns of the United States and the coalition must be given straight and clearly through the United States.
> 
> What is the reason that this is not happening? And they must devolve whatever concerns of Pakistan is, absolutely, directly. That is what diplomacy is, really. And we must do that. We will &#8212; Pakistan I know will want to address this issue against al Qaeda and Taliban.
> 
> All that is happening. Isn&#8217;t there a disconnect that while everyone accuses the ISI and the army that we are involved with the Taliban, and look at what they are doing. Look at what happened in this base, the naval base. And look at what has been happening all around.
> 
> But yet we are being blamed that we are with the Taliban. And the Taliban are doing this to the army. They have attacked our general headquarters. Isn&#8217;t there some disconnect? Isn&#8217;t there something wrong in this logic?
> 
> Obviously, there is something wrong in the logic. The problem is that there&#8217;s maybe &#8212; maybe I&#8217;m saying people are not talking straight and up front.
> 
> MORGAN: The problem in the logic comes when you discover that Osama bin Laden is in the middle of Pakistan, because clearly to the Americans, a lot of them will be thinking this is not a coincidence. He&#8217;s either been harbored there or somebody knew he was there. Otherwise it doesn&#8217;t make any sense.
> 
> So I think the problem with the Taliban relationship with Pakistan is it becomes suspicious. MUSHARRAF: No, if this was the case, it doesn&#8217;t stand with logic. If there was complicity, and he&#8217;s there for five years, I get directly involved. That means I was complicit. I would like to give a logical &#8211;
> 
> MORGAN: Had you been president &#8211;
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Let me complete this. Now, if that was the case, I would like &#8212; I would have wanted to take leverage out of it. When I was at the receiving end in the 2007, I should have done something with this Osama bin Laden card and gained advantage.
> 
> So obviously it is illogical. It is not the case. May I also add &#8211;
> 
> MORGAN: You mean you would have traded the information that you had bin Laden?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: I would have done something to turn the tables in my favor.
> 
> MORGAN: You wouldn&#8217;t have just handed him over to the Americans?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: I don&#8217;t know.
> 
> MORGAN: Wouldn&#8217;t that be the responsible thing to do?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: I would have used this card to my favor. That is what I&#8217;m saying. I wouldn&#8217;t have left it to the next government. You hand him over to the next government.
> 
> MORGAN: Can I just question the ethics of that for a moment? If you&#8217;re a layman like me, and you say you would have used the existence of bin Laden in Pakistan to your advantage &#8211;
> 
> MUSHARRAF: You must understand my logic. I&#8217;m saying if I was complicit, if I knew, I would have done that. If I was being analytical that I knew and I&#8217;m harboring and hiding him, I would have done this maybe.
> 
> MORGAN: If you had known for a fact where bin Laden was, would you have handed him over to America?
> 
> MUSHARRAF: Let&#8217;s not get into the details of something which didn&#8217;t happen. Obviously &#8211;
> 
> MORGAN: Well, it might happen again. That&#8217;s why I&#8217;m asking.
> 
> MUSHARRAF: I can&#8217;t answer you right away. It&#8217;s not a simple question/answer issue. It&#8217;s a very serious issue.
> 
> MORGAN: Let me make it simple. Bin laden is dead. If you go back into power and you become president again, and you discover that a senior member of al Qaeda, who has without any doubt been committing atrocities, is living in another compound near Karachi or somewhere, would you tell the Americans? MUSHARRAF: I would like to take action. Why should I tell the Americans? However, there is intelligence cooperation. Even finding that man out, in my time, it was always &#8212; intelligence had always been cooperating.
> 
> Technical intelligence has &#8212; are more with the United States. So to locate a person, it was always been in ISI and CIA together.
> 
> So they would know already. And if they don&#8217;t know, yes, indeed, I would like to inform them, but take action myself,
> 
> MORGAN: Mr. President, thank you very much indeed.
> 
> *** END OF INTERVIEW ***






I watched this interview live - Morgan nearly "Nailed" Musharraf & there were lots of "umms" & "aaaaaa's" , btw he Called Obama Arrogant - that was epic

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sur

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> Mush f..ked up *by killing Bugti n messin with chief justic*.
> 
> IM has gutts.
> 
> Il chose IK for PM.
> AND
> Mush for president.


 


NOT only that,,, count-in *NRO* & imposing the most CRIMINAL govt. ever on us,,, 
*NOT building ANY DAM during 8 years of his "KINGSHIP"* when he was all-in-all..
NO real development...
*ONLY* fake hype in stock-exchange,,, 
baseless-property hype coz of post-911-scare-caused transfer of funds to Pakistan,,, 
Credit-based flux of vehicles on roads incapable of handling all those vehicles...
Selling Pakistanis to US for money,,, rather *selling PAKISTAN itself for little bucks & a place in eternal-hell*...
Mr."sab-say-pehlay-pakistan" was *so quick to slip away from pakistan *& now sitting away as if Pakistan was his LAST priority... Coward who used to claim so-repeatedly "&#1605;&#1610;&#1722; &#1603;&#1587;&#1609; &#1587;&#1746; &#1672;&#1585;&#1578;&#1575; &#1606;&#1607;&#1610;&#1722; &#1607;&#1608;&#1722;" out-of-his inferiority complex...
He is a good orator no doubt,,, BUT all his vows have consistently proven merely to be *words-of-mouth* that don't go deeper than his throat...
Allowed CIA freely in tribal-belt & rest of country as well...
Stopping ISI from keeping chk on CIA... 
Letting indian-terrorists-TTP build tunnels & stock-pile weapons in SWAT under-cover of MMA's govt in Sarhad...
Murdered a *Pakistan-Loyal-Balooch Leader* "Bughti"...
Facilitating killing of Beenazeer by the executioner "Rahman Malik & Co." to get sympathy votes to PPP & to make place for Mr.Ghaddari...
Alleging our hero, AQKhan, of all so-called proliferation Army ordered under Mushy's orders... Those who believe AQ-Khan was free enough to go & share contractor's info with other countries on his own should see psychiatrist... They have serious problems with their senses...

-
-
-

In short *a TRAITOR*...... who knows very well that Pakistanis figured the real evil inside him....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Leader

pak-marine said:


> both of them are wrong musharaf (no matter how good) threw an elected govt sat as a dictator for 9 years ,* Imran khan wants to take us back to square one*


 
and how is that ? all his party asks is to act in a civilized way, we cannot put our state on stake for some fascists, who want nothing but to see bloodshed in the country... just to satisfy their thirst...

the question is do we want to get out of this state of civil war or not? and PTI doesnot want bloodshed on both sides, since on both sides its PAKistanies that are dying...


----------



## Leader

penumbra said:


> Imran Khan can never control the entire country. Because his party is too small for that. There will always be one party or another in control of some part of Pakistan. In USA these bastards have two parties, so when one loses, the other still gets a large share.
> 
> In Pakistan there are so many parties, i mean look how powerful the MQM and PML(N) are even though the head of state and head of government are from PPP.


 
I hear alot of people who dream nothing, think nothing, act nothing believe that nothing is going to change... it is their state of mind which is not progressive and they personally donot contribute to the society anything positive, so they just become numb. 

what to call a person who has lost hope ?

ideological parties do take time to gear up at national level... especially when you have to break through Two parties and one MQM... people who are enslaved by them would take time and on the other hand so will PTI...its a step by step process, PTI is far more mature in its actions than it was some 10 years back... so in Pakistan goals like justice for all are hard to achieve, it would take time and tremendous struggle, as it is a battle between the progressive forces and status quo...and to uproot the status quo is the most difficult task in political history...yet people with vision have achieved it, or have set examples for others to follow...and PTI chair person Imran khan surely do have this quality...and he has proved his worth many times without being in power.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## moha199

AstanoshKhan said:


> Why is it so hard for you to understand what I'm trying to make it through your brain. Okay, Imran may be adulterer, he may be an alcohol consumer, he may be committing any sin which is against the teaching of Islam, but Imran has never used religion or Islam in his speeches specifically to appease the masses and in conjuring them to support his party. What could be said if the very fabric of the party has a word 'Muslim' in it but the leader is no where Islamic. I call it hypocrisy and deception, and you are allowed to disagree with me.
> 
> Moha, it looks like you don't know anything about Musharraf. One of my closest was a security guard of Musharraf and I can tell you more about his personality and acts then even his wife would.


 
Listen i have gave up on kids who are running their mind around!. As far as i know Musharraf, He has not even used a religious card not even once, and as far as you speaking about your friend being security guard of Musharraf,!!!! listen king of baboons. We don't take fabricated crap on this forum. WTF seriously what is up with this forum. you guys have mad your self an in front of indians, they kick your anywhere on this forum. Because you guys don't know how to hold an argument. Seriously how do you guys work? it's out of my guess. How do you know then if i was not working for Musharraf as his personal guard? KID and yes first time i will use harsh words on this forum from dated way back to 2006......!!!! We are not dumb or should i say we are not PTI members who are dumb. We use brain. You are telling me that Musharraf's guards were or are against him? do you know that he had 6 close guards and 4 are still with him even up to today. go into details go google this, this is information tech world. 70% things are on net. go read news of 2008 where ISPR told that Musharraf's four personal presidential guards are retired and now shifted to UK with Musharraf and they are giving security to Musharraf. All guards of Musharraf were and still loyal to him. this is common sense. Kiyani doesn't tell pashah to give him guards but he picks them. his own trusted people who would lay their lifes for him same goes for Musharraf. we have morons by ton on this forum now. I guess it's time for me to quit this forum. now that i come here and see Pakistan being insulted by everyone because members are not capable to defend the arguments instead they are showing their emotions. *My complain is to webmaster* that every since real members left you kept bringing more members without any standards. now we have this forum full with yahoo chat type talk. I love Pakistan as much as i love my life, I spent 10 hours a day on this forum for two years reading posting, gaining knowledge. When i spoke 95% i spoke with links and evidence. but now this forum all has to offer that my abbu key bhai key batay ke dost ke abu ne bataya tha keh yeh howa ya wo howa. now this is what we have source.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aks18

Mushi's supporters are saying imran khan is extremists he want to settle down with killers of 35,000 pakistanis ,,,, tell me one thing who brought all these suicide bomb attacks in pakistan ??? it was mushi who started this fire which covered whole pakistan with in years .. when imran khan is saying lets talk with them even americans are trying to settle down with talibans why cant we ??? thats what imran khan saying... u cannot stop suicide attacks you will keep on fighting with these talibans they will keep on killing your citizens by bomb blasts ... 


Mushi started war on terror on the orders of america now pakistan is on the edge of destruction .


----------



## S.M.R

sur said:


> NOT only that,,, count-in *NRO* & imposing the most CRIMINAL govt. ever on us,,,
> *NOT building ANY DAM during 8 years of his "KINGSHIP"* when he was all-in-all..
> NO real development...
> *ONLY* fake hype in stock-exchange,,,
> baseless-property hype coz of post-911-scare-caused transfer of funds to Pakistan,,,
> Credit-based flux of vehicles on roads incapable of handling all those vehicles...
> Selling Pakistanis to US for money,,, rather *selling PAKISTAN itself for little bucks & a place in eternal-hell*...
> Mr."sab-say-pehlay-pakistan" was *so quick to slip away from pakistan *& now sitting away as if Pakistan was his LAST priority... Coward who used to claim so-repeatedly "&#1605;&#1610;&#1722; &#1603;&#1587;&#1609; &#1587;&#1746; &#1672;&#1585;&#1578;&#1575; &#1606;&#1607;&#1610;&#1722; &#1607;&#1608;&#1722;" out-of-his inferiority complex...
> He is a good orator no doubt,,, BUT all his vows have consistently proven merely to be *words-of-mouth* that don't go deeper than his throat...
> Allowed CIA freely in tribal-belt & rest of country as well...
> Stopping ISI from keeping chk on CIA...
> Letting indian-terrorists-TTP build tunnels & stock-pile weapons in SWAT under-cover of MMA's govt in Sarhad...
> Murdered a *Pakistan-Loyal-Balooch Leader* "Bughti"...
> Facilitating killing of Beenazeer by the executioner "Rahman Malik & Co." to get sympathy votes to PPP & to make place for Mr.Ghaddari...
> Alleging our hero, AQKhan, of all so-called proliferation Army ordered under Mushy's orders... Those who believe AQ-Khan was free enough to go & share contractor's info with other countries on his own should see psychiatrist... They have serious problems with their senses...
> 
> In short *a TRAITOR*...... who knows very well that Pakistanis figured the real evil inside him....


 

 It is surprising that you blame mush for NRO, and forget the period the cases were remained in court and nothing was proved. Further, Nawaz sharif himself accepted in meesaq e jamhooriat that the cases were nothing but a political move.
 Pakistan is still in excess of electricity, the load shedding is just drama of present govt. to get huge kick backs. Just look at the capacities: WAPDA's Total Hydal + Thermal capacity is 11272 MW, KESC's 1756 MW, Total IPPs is 6365 MW, Nuclear is 462 MW, hence total capacity is 19855 MW, now just compare the present demand of electricity. I can give further complete details if you want.
 For stock exchange and property you held mush responsible? how come? Please prove with facts and figures, not with the political statements which our politicians do in talk shows.
 Whoever got the leased vehicles successfully the paid the leasing installments and became owner of vehicles. Further, that also enhanced the sale of vehicles, hence more production means more jobs, more revenues to govt.
 Pakistan is continuously being sold to US, the only difference is that we got non refundable $$$ his era, while other brought in shape of debt.
 Political statements.
 Political statements.
 He never allowed CIA / black water in his era. any link of news from his era will be appreciated. It was haqqani / zardari who allowed bypassing ISI. Just check out the dates when RD came to Pakistan.
baseless allegation.
Again baseless allegation, Was it Mush who created MMA? any law and order situation in the province is responsibility of provincial govt. not that of president.
 Had musharraf ordered the killing of that Loyal Bugti? Just read out the statistics that how many times our gas lines blown up during bugti era. Have you even to Balochistan? the development which was done in Mush era, was never done in the entire history of Balochistan in total. Where did bugtis get rocket launchers from? They were fighting with and killing the forces and he died in cross fire.
 Well, Benazir murder. lol, just look at the videos for the day of killing, the body language of her security incharge and its subsequent killing. Do you still believe Mush facilitated so.
Well AQ khan case is a sensitive issue, will not talk about that. Just read the history that how AQ khan was brought into Pakistan.
Please show me a single FINANCIAL SCAM against him.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aks18

a simple question for the supporters of Mushi traitor ,,, we are fighting with those people to whom chengaiz khan super power of his time unable to , britishers super power of its time also tried to captured them but they also failed and in the end they settle down by table talk same happend with russia and in the end result was end of USSR ,, now its america who are also going to leave this area by settling issues with talibans ,,,


my question is ,, the countries with trillions of dollars economy and super powers could not take down these afghan warriors how we going to finish them ??? 
our country is on edge of bankrupt we have wasted billions of dollars on the american war if we have invested all this money in to education and development results would have been different till now .


----------



## S.M.R

moha199 said:


> Listen i have gave up on kids who are running their mind around!. As far as i know Musharraf, He has not even used a religious card not even once, and as far as you speaking about your friend being security guard of Musharraf,!!!! listen king of baboons. We don't take fabricated crap on this forum. WTF seriously what is up with this forum. you guys have mad your self an in front of indians, they kick your anywhere on this forum. Because you guys don't know how to hold an argument. Seriously how do you guys work? it's out of my guess. How do you know then if i was not working for Musharraf as his personal guard? KID and yes first time i will use harsh words on this forum from dated way back to 2006......!!!! We are not dumb or should i say we are not PTI members who are dumb. We use brain. You are telling me that Musharraf's guards were or are against him? do you know that he had 6 close guards and 4 are still with him even up to today. go into details go google this, this is information tech world. 70% things are on net. go read news of 2008 where ISPR told that Musharraf's four personal presidential guards are retired and now shifted to UK with Musharraf and they are giving security to Musharraf. All guards of Musharraf were and still loyal to him. this is common sense. Kiyani doesn't tell pashah to give him guards but he picks them. his own trusted people who would lay their lifes for him same goes for Musharraf. we have morons by ton on this forum now. I guess it's time for me to quit this forum. now that i come here and see Pakistan being insulted by everyone because members are not capable to defend the arguments instead they are showing their emotions. *My complain is to webmaster* that every since real members left you kept bringing more members without any standards. now we have this forum full with yahoo chat type talk. I love Pakistan as much as i love my life, I spent 10 hours a day on this forum for two years reading posting, gaining knowledge. When i spoke 95% i spoke with links and evidence. *but now this forum all has to offer that my abbu key bhai key batay ke dost ke abu ne bataya tha keh yeh howa ya wo howa. now this is what we have source.*


     
Calm down moha.

choosing anyone is one's personal decision, no one can force any one, rather make an argument. I personally respect Imran Khan just bcaz of his pain for the nation. Whatever he says is correct. But just watch him in any talk show, he talks baseless. Like he is corrupt, he should be kicked etc etc.

I have said earlier, Both of the are faaaar better than others, but if we are left with IK and Mush, i ll certainly go with Mush. as Mush has been tested, but Imran is yet to be tested for whatever he says in Jalsas, Juloos and dharnas.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aks18

innocentboy said:


> It is surprising that you blame mush for NRO, and forget the period the cases were remained in court and nothing was proved. Further, Nawaz sharif himself accepted in meesaq e jamhooriat that the cases were nothing but a political move.
> Pakistan is still in excess of electricity, the load shedding is just drama of present govt. to get huge kick backs. Just look at the capacities: WAPDA's Total Hydal + Thermal capacity is 11272 MW, KESC's 1756 MW, Total IPPs is 6365 MW, Nuclear is 462 MW, hence total capacity is 19855 MW, now just compare the present demand of electricity.
> For stock exchange and property you held mush responsible? how come? Please prove with facts and figures, not with the political statements which our politicians do in talk shows.
> Whoever got the leased vehicles successfully the paid the leasing installments and became owner of vehicles. Further, that also enhanced the sale of vehicles, hence more production means more jobs, more revenues to govt.
> Pakistan is continuously being sold to US, the only difference is that we got non refundable $$$ his era, while other brought in shape of debt.
> Political statements.
> Political statements.
> He never allowed CIA / black water in his era. an link of news from his era will be appreciated. It was haqqani / zardari who allowed bypassing ISI.
> baseless allegation.
> Again baseless allegation, Was it Mush who created MMA? any law and order situation in the province is responsibility of provincial govt. not that of president.
> Had musharraf ordered the killing of that Loyal Bugti? Just read out the statistics that how many times our gas lines blown up during bugti era. Have you even to Balochistan? the development which was done in Mush era, was never done in the entire history of Balochistan in total. Where did bugtis get rocket launchers from? They were fighting with and killing the forces and he died in cross fire.
> Well, Benazir murder. lol, just look at the videos for the day of killing, the body language of her security incharge and its subsequent killing. Do you still believe Mush facilitated so.
> Well AQ khan case is a sensitive issue, will not talk about that. Just read the history that how AQ khan was brought into Pakistan.
> Please show me a single FINANCIAL SCAM against him.


 

o come on yar you are jiyala of mushi i have seen jiyalas of PPP and PML N they also justify themselves by words just like you doing .. mushi is past now think about pakistan now he made property and money and enjoying his life in secured country by making our country insecure .


----------



## aks18

innocentboy said:


> Calm down moha.
> 
> choosing anyone is one's personal decision, no one can force any one, rather make an argument. I personally respect Imran Khan just bcaz of his pain for the nation. Whatever he says is correct. But just watch him in any talk show, he talks baseless. Like he is corrupt, he should be kicked etc etc.
> 
> I have said earlier, Both of the are faaaar better than others, but if we are left with IK and Mush, i ll certainly go with Mush. as Mush has been tested, but Imran is yet to be tested for whatever he says in Jalsas, Juloos and dharnas.


 

yeah mushi was tested for 9 years but in 9 years he gave us gift of war on terror and suicide bomb blasts  imagine what he gona do in his next tenure if ( which is impossible) he came in power


----------



## S.M.R

aks18 said:


> o come on yar you are jiyala of mushi i have seen jiyalas of PPP and PML N they also justify themselves by words just like you doing .. mushi is past now think about pakistan now he made property and money and enjoying his life in secured country by making our country insecure .


 
I am not a jayala of mushi, I am an ordinary person of Pakistan, who analyse things based on facts and figures, not based on some political mileage statements given in 'Low Cost Programs' i.e. Talk Shows.


----------



## aks18

innocentboy said:


> I am not a jayala of mushi, I am an ordinary person of Pakistan, who analyse things based on facts and figures, not based on some political mileage statements given in 'Low Cost Programs' i.e. Talk Shows.


 


yeah yeah i can see who is jiyala and who is not here  only jiyalas make such a huge posts for his leaders


----------



## S.M.R

aks18 said:


> yeah yeah i can see who is jiyala and who is not here  only jiyalas make such a huge posts for his leaders


 
my posts are for my Country dear.


----------



## aks18

innocentboy said:


> my posts are for my Country dear.


 

you posts were for a traitor of my beloved land who just destroyed this country by implementing orders of his master america .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## abdulahad1

People should wake up now and stop distracting with the changes of face, the system in which we are living will lead us to eternal failure even we wait for it's correctness for centuries. We are living according to New Word Order which is Capitalism and it's gateway is Democracy; which means "Government of the People, Government by the People, Government for the People", means People have full control to live according to their will by making laws with majority.
Human can never made such laws which fulfill the requirements of all the people because he is not fit to say or make exact law which is universal. People have to obey Him who creates them, who know all the requirements and instincts of all Human kind, which is "ALLAH RABUL ALAMEEN". He says in the Quran "Order to obey is only for Allah" (YOUSUF:40).
And in Parliament Laws and Orders; means Halal and Haram are decided according to 2/3 majority and impose on people, which is the biggest SIN. Humans become servants of humans. In reality Humans are "ABDULALLAH" Servants of ALLAH; who made them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

