Generals curse upon country: Nawaz Sharif

[Interceptor]

The soldiers had the rank of lieutenants. This historical remark and story was told by retired General Shahid Hamid who was present in the diner, when it took place.

 

[Interceptor]

PART XII (contd)
Miscellaneous
Chapter 2. Armed Forces

243. Command of Armed Forces.
(1) The Federal Government shall have control and command of the Armed Forces.

[258A] [(1A) Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provision, the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces shall vest in the President.]

(2) The President shall, subject to law, have power-

(a) to raise and maintain the Military, Naval and Air Forces of Pakistan; and the Reserves of such Forces; [258B] [and]
(b) to grant Commissions in such Forces [258C] [.]
[258D]

[258E]
[(3) The President shall, [258F] [in consultation with the Prime Minister], appoint-
(a) the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee;
(b) the Chief of the Army Staff;
(c) the Chief of the Naval Staff; and
(d) the Chief of the Air Staff,
and shall also determine their salaries and allowances.]

244. Oath of Armed Forces.
Every member of the Armed Forces shall make oath in the form set out in the Third Schedule.

245. Functions of Armed Forces.
[259] [(1)] The Armed Forces shall, under the directions of the Federal Government, defend Pakistan against external aggression or threat of war, and, subject to law, act in aid of civil power when called upon to do so.

[259A] (2) The validity of any direction issued by the Federal Government under clause (1) shall not be called in question in any court.

(3) A High Court shall not exercise any jurisdiction under Article 199 in relation to any area in which the Armed Forces of Pakistan are, for the time being, acting in aid of civil power in pursuance of Article 245:

Provided that this clause shall not be deemed to affect the jurisdiction of the High Court in respect of any proceeding pending immediately before the day on which the Armed Forces start acting in aid of civil power.

(4) Any proceeding in relation to an area referred to in clause (3) instituted on or after the day the Armed Forces start acting in aid of civil power and pending in any High Court shall remain suspended for the period during which the Armed Forces are so acting.]

http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/part12.ch2.html

What happens if they dont obey this law well in theory then,
This is Article 6,

6. High treason.
(1) Any person who abrogates or attempts or conspires to abrogate, subverts or attempts or conspires to subvert the Constitution by use of force or show of force or by other unconstitutional means shall be guilty of high treason.
(2) Any person aiding or abetting the acts mentioned in clause (1) shall likewise be guilty of high treason.
(3) [5] [Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] shall by law provide for the punishment of persons found guilty of high treason.

 

[BATMAN]

There can be much stated to clear your self made claims, but now its clear (to me atleast) that you have an agenda, other wise you should have think twice to malign the saviours of Pakistan.
I respect them for one simple reason that they risk there life to protect us from external and internal miscreants and agressors. Actually, they do little more than that.

Mr Jinnah stood up and walked towards that officer and grabbed him by his shirt collar

I have read many books about Mr. Jinnah but never came across such occourance of events, which you have quoted.
You always embed irrelevant theories in your post.

Any how, below remark of your's prove that Z.A.Bhutto was a corrupt, discriminate and a dictator. He appointed Zia, as cheif not on merit but on the basis of favoritism, to craft Pakistan military as his pet and stretch his rule beyond the laws of state, and be answerable to non.

General Zia use to do every thing to impress Mr Bhutto, he tried to impress him when ever he had the chance, so that he could be appointed as the Chief of army. Zia was a coward he was also terrified because after Zia came into being chief of army, he could also be fired if found not performing for Mr Bhutto.

Again I will say, Musharraf is not Zia, and if his appointment as a cheif was a preferential treatment than N.Sharif fall in the same category as Z.A.Bhutto.

The prime minister has the power to question his chief of army it has also the power to fire and appoint a new chief.

Fire, like with bullet or relieving him from his duties, heaven sake certain positions demand decent behavior and proper honor.
Prime minister can certainly appoint new army cheif but he cannot divide the army and have two cheifs (one in air and one on ground). N.Sharif did not followed the right procedure to remove serving cheif.
BTW, who had the power to question Prime minister, laws of state should be modified so that prime minister's office can be held only twice by same person.
Only those political parties should be allowed to contest elections who uphold same democratic values in within there own parties.

 

[Interceptor]

There can be much stated to clear your self made claims, but now its clear (to me atleast) that you have an agenda, other wise you should have think twice to malign the saviours of Pakistan.
I respect them for one simple reason that they risk there life to protect us from external and internal miscreants and agressors. Actually, they do little more than that.

I read more history books then you, your stupid claim that I made this up I read it and I recalled it and typed for a lethargic like you.

I have read many books about Mr. Jinnah but never came across such occourance of events, which you have quoted.
You always embed irrelevant theories in your post.

I doubt you have, you didn't even read his name in your life time. If you had read books on him you wouldn't be supporting Musharraf in this case any Dictator.

Any how, below remark of your's prove that Z.A.Bhutto was a corrupt, discriminate and a dictator. He appointed Zia, as cheif not on merit but on the basis of favoritism, to craft Pakistan military as his pet and stretch his rule beyond the laws of state, and be answerable to non.

That is the ideology you carry, it was born into you, you would call Jinnah the same after all he came as a democrate.

Again I will say, Musharraf is not Zia, and if his appointment as a cheif was a preferential treatment than N.Sharif fall in the same category as Z.A.Bhutto.

By all means explain why? But first explain who claimed this speculation.

Fire, like with bullet or relieving him from his duties, heaven sake certain positions demand decent behavior and proper honor.
Prime minister can certainly appoint new army cheif but he cannot divide the army and have two cheifs (one in air and one on ground). N.Sharif did not followed the right procedure to remove serving cheif.
BTW, who had the power to question Prime minister, laws of state should be modified so that prime minister's office can be held only twice by same person.
Only those political parties should be allowed to contest elections who uphold same democratic values in within there own parties.

Since when did you believe in democracy it is simple the Prime minister has that power it was given to him. The army chief are not allowed to come in to politics they serve the Prime minister and President. Look at the current government how is the Prime minister going to tell the Chief of army or the joint Chief to do this when the Chief of army, has the power over both and plus he wont listen to any one as he is also the President, its a complete joke.

 

[Interceptor]

Batman you claimed I made this up well read the below.

believe, like Mr. M.A. Jinnah, in democracy, a free press, an independent judiciary, and equal rights for women and all minorities. These days it is pertinent to recall that on the actual day of Independence, Mr Jinnah told a complaining Army Officer - Colonel (later General) Akbar Khan, of subsequent Rawalpindi Conspiracy fame: "Never forget that you are the servants of the state. You do not make policy. It is we, the people’s representatives, who decide how the country is to be run. Your job is to only obey the decisions of your civilian masters."

http://www.blogger.com/profile/01350929185765118924

 

[Interceptor]

You Batman are immature and it just shows you are a kid that has little or no knowledge. If this how you respect people then you wont go very far.

 

[niaz]

I was born in 1943 and lived and worked in Pakistan until 1977 ( except for 4 years studying in the UK). I have visited Pakistan at least every couple of years since. Therefore I have experienced the change in the social, economic and political changes first hand. Ayub Khan's era onwards has been closely observed by me. On this basis most of the events I have posted are factual, only the interpretation of how it happened could be biased. ( I dont deny that I have also have a point of view). For example when I say that ZAB rigged elections in 1976, the event is a fact. Only difference can be that instead a PPP stalwart would maintain that ZAB was only accused of rigging elections.

I have seen a lot of posts with a very emotional bias, some even denying or ignoring facts outright and trying to portray a deliberate political decision such as appointment of Zia ul Haq and of Mushharraf as if the all the fault lies with these two and the people who chose these junior generals over many senior generals were innocent victims. I find such arguments rather amusing. Buck stops at the top. If an incompetent person is hired to a job, the person who hires also guilty of negligence.

IMO, nearly all Pakistani leaders, whether civilian or military have been power hungery and intolerant of any one disagreeing with them. ZAB is no exception. No doubt after Quaid e Azam, ZAB was the most intelligent of Pakistan's leader. He was charismatic and his foriegn policy was good. However, ZAB was also very arrogant and autocratic. Every thing that I mentioned earlier, such as dissolution of NWFP and Baluchistan Assemblies and appointment Army, Navy and Airforce chiefs as his yes men is correct. Hon Murad K will remember the first PAF chief appointed by ZAB; Zafar Chaudhry who was then on the way out and heading PIA;to the best of my info Zafar was not well liked by most of the PAF. ZAB could have chosen any other general but he opted for Zia because he misread Zia's wily charracter. Doesn't this show a weakness in ZAB's psyche, that he only liked Yes men and would opt for what he thought a docile Army Chief and pass over worthy and deserving senior generals.

We talked about ZAB's hanging, do the hon. forum members remember why ZAB was convicted by the supreme court ?? He was charged with the ordering the killing of an advocate, his opponent, Mr. Kasuri ( I dont remember he was Ahmad Raza or Mahmud Ali). The police officer in charge of this killing and three other policeman admitted their guilt and were hanged. The police SI claimed that the order came from ZAB himself. This was only the police officers word and no written order could be found. This was the main reason of the two dissenting Supreme Court Justices. One died and the other, Justice Shah ( a Pashtoon) was retired early. Justice Shah's son used work for me in Attock oil London and is now General Manager in one of Japanese Trading House's London office thus I know what I am talking about.

Nawaz Sharif era is more recent and a lot of forum members are aware of his abuse of power as already mentioned elsewhere by me. Why did Nawaz not choose Ali Quli Khan?? Nawaz also wanted a docile and 'Yes' general and thought that Mushy being a Mohajir would be controllable. Nawaz made mistake and thus paid for it.

Why then only blame the generals. Aren't the the leaders who make wrong choice equally guilty?? Folk, IMHO 'Is hammam main sub nangey'. Meaning the regrettably both the civilan and miliatry are guilty of abuse of power. It is wrong to blame the generals only. Nawaz Sharif of all people should be the last man to complain. He was the most vindictive of all the civilian leaders. All the cases against Benazir and Asif Zardari were started by his governmnet and Sen Saif ur Rahman.

 

[Interceptor]

I was born in 1943 and lived and worked in Pakistan until 1977 ( except for 4 years studying in the UK). I have visited Pakistan at least every couple of years since. Therefore I have experienced the change in the social, economic and political changes first hand. Ayub Khan's era onwards has been closely observed by me. On this basis most of the events I have posted are factual, only the interpretation of how it happened could be biased. ( I dont deny that I have also have a point of view). For example when I say that ZAB rigged elections in 1976, the event is a fact. Only difference can be that instead a PPP stalwart would maintain that ZAB was only accused of rigging elections.

That is was what you claim sir, however, there have been dedicated books written about that era and these were of those who were in that picture that phaze of time, I have to read that ZAB had rigged the elections but it is a story only made by the ARMY.

Lots of the people of the ZAB era who were against him have also written there statements and agreed that ZAB was murdered only so that he does not get in the way of Zia.

I have seen a lot of posts with a very emotional bias, some even denying or ignoring facts outright and trying to portray a deliberate political decision such as appointment of Zia ul Haq and of Mushharraf as if the all the fault lies with these two and the people who chose these junior generals over many senior generals were innocent victims. I find such arguments rather amusing. Buck stops at the top. If an incompetent person is hired to a job, the person who hires also guilty of negligence.

Niaz the Generals who are appointed to protect the country break the constitution as if it were not there, however, it is not the responsibility of the of the primemisnister to follow all day around the generals the Joint chief of staff was created therefore, the article six was written therfore the need of a free and strong judiciary is required.

IMO, nearly all Pakistani leaders, whether civilian or military have been power hungery and intolerant of any one disagreeing with them. ZAB is no exception. No doubt after Quaid e Azam, ZAB was the most intelligent of Pakistan's leader. He was charismatic and his foriegn policy was good. However, ZAB was also very arrogant and autocratic. Every thing that I mentioned earlier, such as dissolution of NWFP and Baluchistan Assemblies and appointment Army, Navy and Airforce chiefs as his yes men is correct. Hon Murad K will remember the first PAF chief appointed by ZAB; Zafar Chaudhry who was then on the way out and heading PIA;to the best of my info Zafar was not well liked by most of the PAF. ZAB could have chosen any other general but he opted for Zia because he misread Zia's wily charracter. Doesn't this show a weakness in ZAB's psyche, that he only liked Yes men and would opt for what he thought a docile Army Chief and pass over worthy and deserving senior generals.

From what I have read I never found that ZAB liked to "yes man" all around him, what he did when he came to power was to appoint people who were very intelligent and allow them to control the government. Niaz, ZAB created the post of Joint Chief of staff for the very reason so that the generals are in control of the military and the military is in control of the government. ZAB was a human he made mistakes like every one, however, he learned from them rather than have a ritual to never learn and live like this for decades on.

ZAB was not a dictator nor did he resemble any dictator, his power was limited and he did not have arogance in him he had flair and strong resilience, similar to Jinnah who created Pakistan, Jinnah was man who would walk the talk rather than keep saying something that will never happen. ZAB said there will be constitution it was.

Military governments are the torrent of Pakistan's future and they will not add anything but choas to Pakistan, the military government of the Past have destroyed Pakistan lets take the example of Bangladesh.

We talked about ZAB's hanging, do the hon. forum members remember why ZAB was convicted by the supreme court ?? He was charged with the ordering the killing of an advocate, his opponent, Mr. Kasuri ( I dont remember he was Ahmad Raza or Mahmud Ali). The police officer in charge of this killing and three other policeman admitted their guilt and were hanged. The police SI claimed that the order came from ZAB himself. This was only the police officers word and no written order could be found. This was the main reason of the two dissenting Supreme Court Justices. One died and the other, Justice Shah ( a Pashtoon) was retired early. Justice Shah's son used work for me in Attock oil London and is now General Manager in one of Japanese Trading House's London office thus I know what I am talking about.

Ahmed Raza was the advocate who was murdered, however, you very well know that this was a plot to hang and kill a ZAB. There was one judge who was very famous in Pakistan his family was very famous and very educated I do not remember the name but he opposed the rulling against ZAB, he later was convicted by the Dicatatorship for not passing his Matric he was pushed around to take back his statement and say that ZAB is a criminal, he ran for his life and left to UK later he died there, just before he left Pakistan a family member of his died and the entire government was there to mourn for the death and even Zia gave a statement to tribute this family.

Niaz, the Dictatorship was behind this and they were backed by the investors and Landlords to topple ZAB and release the creatures of hell to control the Pakistani economy.

Nawaz Sharif era is more recent and a lot of forum members are aware of his abuse of power as already mentioned elsewhere by me. Why did Nawaz not choose Ali Quli Khan?? Nawaz also wanted a docile and 'Yes' general and thought that Mushy being a Mohajir would be controllable. Nawaz made mistake and thus paid for it.

Why then only blame the generals. Aren't the the leaders who make wrong choice equally guilty?? Folk, IMHO 'Is hammam main sub nangey'. Meaning the regrettably both the civilan and miliatry are guilty of abuse of power. It is wrong to blame the generals only. Nawaz Sharif of all people should be the last man to complain. He was the most vindictive of all the civilian leaders. All the cases against Benazir and Asif Zardari were started by his governmnet and Sen Saif ur Rahman.

Ur Rahman was a Zia movement member he followed him and he is the Guy who backed the generals to come back, however, like I said the whole game is about money and power. The Nawaz government was then runned by corrupts and the same corrupts now work under Musharraf, Nawaz now knows that he should never trust the MQM and a military regime, the man who use to be against ZAB one day in a interview he had taken it all back and said he was a Great leader i.e. he had to " Apna Thooka wa chatana ".

Sir, this country has hardly ever seen a government survive a whole term the reasons is not that the leaders are wrong the reason is that the Military does not want a stable government, because that would mean they can not return to power. The military would every time come into politics even though they don not belong there.

The countries politics will only mature when these governments are allowed to progress in there term, if the government is corrupt then let the people deal with it and in turn this will allow other leaders to have the chance to run the country as the people desire. The Judiciary should be free and the government should be under the judiciary rather the government on top of them.

 

[niaz]

Hon Interceptor,

Human mind never ceases to amaze me. How different people can look at the same event but have totally different interpretations. I have experienced ZAB era first hand and I have a fairly good idea of how he was really like whether you continue to believe that he was Allah gift to Pakistan or not.

A lot of people make value judgements and then stick to it no matter what. As an example BB to this day refuses to accept the balme for the Murtaza Bhutto's murder. In the program 'Jawab Deh' she was confronted with:

1. BB herself was the Premier of Pakistan

2. Qaim Ali Shah of PPP was Chief Minister of Sindh

3. IG Police was a personal friend of Asif Zardari.

4. A party of police laid ambush and killed Murtaza in broad day light.

Benazir conveniently got angry, said that Murtaza was her brother not yours and still blamed the Army.

Regrettably you are no different. Let us agree to disagree, no point in debating when the other party refuses to budge. I wont post any more in this thread.

 

[Lahori paa jee]

Hon Interceptor,

Human mind never ceases to amaze me. How different people can look at the same event but have totally different interpretations. I have experienced ZAB era first hand and I have a fairly good idea of how he was really like whether you continue to believe that he was Allah gift to Pakistan or not.

A lot of people make value judgements and then stick to it no matter what. As an example BB to this day refuses to accept the balme for the Murtaza Bhutto's murder. In the program 'Jawab Deh' she was confronted with:

1. BB herself was the Premier of Pakistan

2. Qaim Ali Shah of PPP was Chief Minister of Sindh

3. IG Police was a personal friend of Asif Zardari.

4. A party of police laid ambush and killed Murtaza in broad day light.

Benazir conveniently got angry, said that Murtaza was her brother not yours and still blamed the Army.

Regrettably you are no different. Let us agree to disagree, no point in debating when the other party refuses to budge. I wont post any more in this thread.

I dont think BB had anything to do with the murder of her brother. This was ISI which eliminated Murtaza

 

[Interceptor]

Hon Interceptor,

Human mind never ceases to amaze me. How different people can look at the same event but have totally different interpretations. I have experienced ZAB era first hand and I have a fairly good idea of how he was really like whether you continue to believe that he was Allah gift to Pakistan or not.

You inspire your self like you feel. It is above all, to your choice to rejoice how you believe the events unfolded.

I do not say Bhutto is god or a messiah, however, I say he was a leader and now trapped in few books.

A lot of people make value judgements and then stick to it no matter what. As an example BB to this day refuses to accept the balme for the Murtaza Bhutto's murder. In the program 'Jawab Deh' she was confronted with:

1. BB herself was the Premier of Pakistan

2. Qaim Ali Shah of PPP was Chief Minister of Sindh

3. IG Police was a personal friend of Asif Zardari.

4. A party of police laid ambush and killed Murtaza in broad day light.

Benazir conveniently got angry, said that Murtaza was her brother not yours and still blamed the Army.

Regrettably you are no different. Let us agree to disagree, no point in debating when the other party refuses to budge. I wont post any more in this thread.

I watched that program so, the question is answered it was the Inteligence services who murdered him for the simple reason he could be used against her government. Murtaza wanted a high ranking posistion in the government, however, he went to extremes to get it, by degrading his sister.

By far all that BB would not murder her own brother it is one more added propoganda, like I said the people who said Bhutto murdered a political opponent even though Niaz if you have first hand knowledge then you should know his party won most of the seets in the parliment. Bhutto was a person who did not use the force of a gun rather he used words and massoned to a paper.

The judge that was against the rulling of Bhutto his name was Safdar Shah, later there was another Judge who is alive to this day he confessed that Bhutto was murdered by the Dictatorship.

I see a trend that the intelegence service was behind it as you can see Bhotto's political opponent and BB's political opponent both dead and blamed on who?

 

[Lahori paa jee]

Mir Murtaza Bhutto was a victim of our intelligence agencies

 

[Interceptor]

Niaz, I also want to add a very important matter that you may not have known though your experience and knowledge is bountiful. The constitution gives protection to the Primeminister and the President of criminal cases and therefore the case against Bhutto was illegitimate and the constitution does not allow it, there can be a hearing against the President and Primeminister after there term is over, however, if the case against Bhutto was plausible then he would have been trailed after his term. However, Zia traitor toppeled his government and to erase him he murdered him and then he poured a chamical on his grave so that there are no remains left of Bhutto.

Hamad Raza was in the PPP and he was against Bhutto, however, Bhutto had many enemies but he didn't kill them there were many members of the PPP who converted to another party, however, Bhutto did not murder them.

 

[Interceptor]

More about General Akbar Khan the Rawalpindi conspiracy.


1951

Rawalpindi Conspiracy Case

March 9, Lahore. Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan has revealed a conspiracy, allegedly aimed at creating anarchy and destroying solidarity of army. He demands support from the people, but says that the details of the conspiracy cannot be revealed due to national considerations.

Maj. Gen Akbar Khan & Brig. M.A. Lateef , accused, have been dismissed. More imprisonments are likely to follow. The inquiries are being carried out under special supervision of Gen. Ayub Khan and Defence Secretary Iskander Mirza

http://pakistanspace.tripod.com/51.htm