Search results

Bad relations with the US come and go. But I don’t know why some among us ignore real politik and are intent on making martyrs out of themselves and everyone else. Political expedience? I suppose and opiate of the masses. But when the source of these comes from the meddling and installations of...

A year ago, opposition were calling for early elections. I really have to ask, if almost half of parliament was already against his government and allies were only on side because of orders and self interest. Why is it such a stretch to imagine that the army/amreeka etc would not even need to...

We’re morons if we really don’t know how to walk and chew gum at the same time. And let me defend the latter here, if the army wants us on good terms with the US, they don’t want it at the expense of strong relations with China.

Eid Mubarak to all. :)

Ah, I got your point now. Mitigation can be done of course, but best to reverse it if mods agree.

Frivolous and ridiculous charges if true. But you reap what you sow. No, IMO negative rating does not apply here. But I am unable to change such things anymore. Best to ask a serving mod. @The Eagle @AgNoStiC MuSliM @LeGenD

Long jibberish which is clearly beyond your ability to argue against. I've already addressed the fact that PTI's perception of foreign conspiracy does not give the Deputy Speaker the power to do what he did. Address that or stop wasting your time with these replies. Nepotism is a stain on the...

Agree. This whole issue of why did the SC move so fast is moronic whining. When you so frivolously and massively violate the constitution, with mala fide intent, and then build upon it by making subsequent nullifiable actions to protect yourself from a vote that the SC previously opined must...

You can read about it in the SC's short order here. But to give you a better picture, here's what I can see - and the read of that of most legal folks and not just amateurs like you and I: PTI leaders had in the run up to this made a few attempts to misapply the constitution, prior to this they...

They were advised on its contents and materiality, the entire bench was briefed by a "neutral party" in charge of such national security measures. The letter should be leaked, let's see how material it actually is, I doubt it.

It's valid criticism as I said before. There was a thread when this news came out, you'll find my comments criticising them there. I'm focussing here on people venting their annoyance at SC decisions re PTI by tangentially saying that judiciary is wrong on xyz. Speak your mind and address the...

Why should you? I don't know brother, why are you? Nonsensical comment, if you don't want to be challenged on providing an explanation for your comments, then don't comment. I remind you, you quoted me here, I didn't start this convo. Lmao

Interesting example, but is there any analysis to prove that Chinese exports are more productive, have more economic viability and that therefore the EU would have more to lose in a trade war? If this is the case, I'd also ask you to kindly show me some analysis. And please also include in it...

I assume you have an issue with all of the above. But the court's decision on rejecting the Presidential reference on disqualifications and on the Speakers' ruling you have no objection to? Right? That stuff you're not willing to debate. Hence my first post which you quoted.

Although I don't have the latest figures, and I'm basing this on an estimate of figures I've looked up. China's trade with the EU represents around 4.3% of the EU's total GDP, whereas it represents probably around 6.4% of China's GDP. So this assessment of who loses more needs more consideration.

Don't back out so soon. :lol: And you're wrong here, you need point out your argument - courts don't have to prove anything. If you're accusing the courts of being wrong, YOU provide an argument as to why and how. The burden of proof lies upon the claimant.

Open a new thread and outline all of your arguments, let's discuss there. We can discuss why the court rejected the Presidential reference and PTI's view on disqualifications, why the court overturned the Speakers' decision and this trivial argument about a court opening late at night.

Both IMO, that's how trade works, purchasing power and industrial capacity are being exchanged.

Justice system is full of flaws, but instead of taking tangential potshots, why not post a new thread challenging the legality of the SC's decision which has you all so worked up. Address the source of your concerns if you're so inclined.

First and last paragraphs are a matter of historic record. The middle is being written right now.