What's new

Musharraf needs treatment in US, lawyer tells court

Pakistani people have alot of good will for musharraf .. as musharraf doesnt ahve any party structure in pakistan, that is why he cant change his support into street power .. the educated class and secular class supports him ..more over due to his emergency he banned a channel in 2007 Geo ( the largest news channel and opnion maker) spread alot of venum against him and all the political parties made him scape goat for their weakness
No he doesn't.

Musharraf is hated by the common man, and no one who's sane in the head supports his lunacy. He did more harm to Pakistan than good.

I hate this nostalgia for him, when we all know full well that he sold out Pakistan's sovereignty.
 
No he doesn't.

Musharraf is hated by the common man, and no one who's sane in the head supports his lunacy. He did more harm to Pakistan than good.

I hate this nostalgia for him, when we all know full well that he sold out Pakistan's sovereignty.

Actually you both are incorrect & correct in same time. If you are talking about general Public, they only see where they got gain, and where they loss. They divide Musharaf era into two parts.

1) 2000-2004, when everyone started to earn more, when IT/Technology Boom came, and everything was "Good about their Income".
2) 2005-2008, when Power struggle started, when militancy grew, when everyone started to run, and Losses toke over profit, Stock Exchange Crashing circulation started, Dollar started to rise, loadshadding started, prices also grew, which in the result bad for general Public, and many people give Zardari credit also to Musharaf, which was the worst thing happened in last 65 years to their Jobs, income, security overall.


@Topic

I guess, we all know where this is heading to.. If courts want real justice, then they should include everyone part of emergency (if that is the topic), if constitution breaking is the criminal act, then Oct 1999 people should also be included.

Otherwise, stop wasting our time by victomizing musharaf, let him flew and return back before 2019 election as a savior of Pakistan, and let this topi drama continue forever :-s
 
Actually you both are incorrect & correct in same time. If you are talking about general Public, they only see where they got gain, and where they loss. They divide Musharaf era into two parts.

1) 2000-2004, when everyone started to earn more, when IT/Technology Boom came, and everything was "Good about their Income".
2) 2005-2008, when Power struggle started, when militancy grew, when everyone started to run, and Losses toke over profit, Stock Exchange Crashing circulation started, Dollar started to rise, loadshadding started, prices also grew, which in the result bad for general Public, and many people give Zardari credit also to Musharaf, which was the worst thing happened in last 65 years to their Jobs, income, security overall.

I don't know if I can agree with that. While there are some commoners that do support Musharraf, most of his support comes from the militarists and upper class. The working class and lower class are almost unanimously against him, and see his rule as more harmful than good.
 
Ignore you must because you are complete idiot. Making personal attacks on an issue which is not personal at all.

You have used 'degenerate', 'not emotionally stable' for me. Just shows your upbringing and a bad name you give to your parents.

Yeah I may be a douche, a narcissist, or a compete idiot, thats my choice ,but you have no right to criticize my deceased parents, judge them again and I will show you exactly how I was raised not to act when enraged....You took the personal attacks to a whole new level there, you just made a familial attack.....
 
just send the guy, i'm sick of listening to news about him all the time, i want a show on real issues :hitwall:
 
It is getting funny the dictator murderer of thousands of Pakistanis sealing Pakistan's fate with ill decisions is literally begging, he kept saying he elevated the status of Pakistan and gave it the best of economic era and yet he couldn't built a state of the art medical center for likes of him generals and politicians...something that would not have cost billions of dollars.
 
Diagnosing Musharraf ‹ Newsweek Pakistan

Diagnosing Musharraf


clock.png
Jan 27 2014
author.png
By Syed Mansoor Hussain


000_Del6281942.jpg


A heart surgeon weighs in on Musharraf’s ticker trouble.

Pervez Musharraf remains hospitalized at the Armed Forces Institute of Cardiology in Rawalpindi. Pakistan’s former president and Army chief has been there since Jan. 2, when he developed heart trouble en route to a special court that is to indict him for the treason of sacking some 60 judges in November 2007. Musharraf’s detour set off a news storm—with contentious political, legal, moral, and ethical issues being furiously debated—that has yet to subside.

Did Musharraf require hospitalization? According to news reports, Musharraf had to be rushed to AFIC after he developed a severe and persistent chest pain that traveled to his arm, began to sweat and feel sick. Such complaints in a 70-year-old are extremely suggestive of serious heart problems and a possible heart attack. If this description of how he felt is correct, immediate hospitalization was the right call.

In classical medical terminology, such complaints were referred to as “unstable angina pectoris” but are now included in the spectrum of “acute coronary syndrome.” At AFIC, Musharraf was admitted to a coronary-care unit and received medications to stabilize his condition. Basic tests were then done. We do not have any details of these initial tests, but we do know that these excluded the possibility of an actual acute myocardial infarction or heart attack.

Subsequent diagnostic tests were also performed. Again, we do not have any details of what tests were done, but based on the reports submitted to the court, one thing is clear: besides having general problems that many people his age have, the important finding was that he has considerable calcium deposits in the arteries of his heart.

It would seem that the one important heart test Musharraf did go through at AFIC was a CT angiogram. This is primarily an advanced x-ray that besides providing a picture of the heart arteries also yields an assessment of the amount of calcium deposited in them. The higher the calcium score, the greater are the chances of having severe blockages of the arteries.

Many of us remember that during one of his visits to the U.S., then-president Musharraf made a mysterious side trip to middle-of-nowhere Paris, Texas, where Pakistani-American cardiologist Dr. Arjumand Hashmi runs a sophisticated cardiac center. It is possible but not confirmed that at that time Musharraf at least underwent a CT angiogram. When Dr. Hashmi now states that Musharraf has serious blockages in his heart arteries, he is probably comparing the calcium scoring done at his facility many years ago with the latest AFIC results.

Based on what is known, it would appear that Musharraf does indeed have considerable blockages of his heart arteries. The extent of these blockages is, however, being debated by people who don’t know the difference between a heart artery and a vein in the heart.

The latest question being raised by these armchair heart specialists is the question of an angiography. They claim Musharraf has refused to have an angiography. As someone who has seen thousands of angiography test results over my professional lifetime, and operated on a few thousand patients based on these results, I am entirely amused by this sudden expertise developed by media personalities and lawyers who have no idea what this test is all about.

Coronary angiography is a specialized test that requires the passage of a catheter or small plastic tube through the artery in the leg or the arm into a heart artery so that a special medicine can be injected and x-ray pictures can be taken to outline artery blockages. This is an invasive procedure. And like all invasive procedures it can only be performed if the patient agrees to go through with it. Medical ethics hold that it is entirely Musharraf’s right to refuse such a procedure. (Frankly, looking at the chief prosecutor in this case, my suggestion to Musharraf as a heart doctor would be to have a coronary angiogram done as soon as possible.)

AFIC is a pretty good place to take care of the problem of heart artery blockages. But, again, it is the patient’s sole right whether he wishes to seek further care from Ajmer Sharif or Paris, Texas. If a Pakistani court or a government official denies a patient that right and there happens to be an unfortunate outcome, will that court or government official then responsible be willing to accept the charge of being accessory to homicide?

Many pundits and politicians are of the opinion that Musharraf is lying, that he was never sick and sought refuge at the Army-run AFIC to avoid indictment. As far as the lying part goes, even the interior minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan has said that Musharraf’s health scare was genuine. Musharraf’s choice to opt for an Army hospital appears fairly obvious and far from sensational: as a former soldier, he obviously felt more comfortable being treated in an Army facility. After Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf chief Imran Khan fell off a forklift last year and required hospitalization for spine fractures, he ended up not in an orthopedic hospital but at his own hospital—a cancer hospital. This was because Khan was sure he would get the best possible care there. Patients prefer hospitals where they know the doctors involved and can expect good care, so it is entirely appropriate that Musharraf went to an Army hospital.

There is also a lot of reactive nonsense about Musharraf’s wanting to seek treatment abroad when there is “quality” medical care available in the country. Both Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif are known to visit London every so often for “routine” medical checkups. Since politicians don’t want people to know they are sick, there’s been no disclosure about the medical details of these checkups. And, of course, we all remember when Asif Ali Zardari as president developed neurological problems thought to be heart trouble and ended up in Dubai for diagnosis and treatment. There’s also the security issue. The chances of successful treatment and survival of Patient Musharraf, Al Qaeda and the Taliban’s most-wanted man, are far brighter abroad.

Hussain is a cardiac surgeon and editor-at-large of Newsweek Pakistan.
 
Yeah I may be a douche, a narcissist, or a compete idiot, thats my choice ,but you have no right to criticize my deceased parents, judge them again and I will show you exactly how I was raised not to act when enraged....You took the personal attacks to a whole new level there, you just made a familial attack.....

im imprrsed!
at least, you are a patriotic raising star?
i guss inthe LINE OF FIRE, like me!
well, keep it up you ill get, the special forces support, when ever we feel you need it?
im on patrol, to night! keep it up bro!

Diagnosing Musharraf ‹ Newsweek Pakistan

Diagnosing Musharraf

clock.png
Jan 27 2014
author.png
By Syed Mansoor Hussain

000_Del6281942.jpg


A heart surgeon weighs in on Musharraf’s ticker trouble.

Pervez Musharraf remains hospitalized at the Armed Forces Institute of Cardiology in Rawalpindi. Pakistan’s former president and Army chief has been there since Jan. 2, when he developed heart trouble en route to a special court that is to indict him for the treason of sacking some 60 judges in November 2007. Musharraf’s detour set off a news storm—with contentious political, legal, moral, and ethical issues being furiously debated—that has yet to subside.

Did Musharraf require hospitalization? According to news reports, Musharraf had to be rushed to AFIC after he developed a severe and persistent chest pain that traveled to his arm, began to sweat and feel sick. Such complaints in a 70-year-old are extremely suggestive of serious heart problems and a possible heart attack. If this description of how he felt is correct, immediate hospitalization was the right call.

In classical medical terminology, such complaints were referred to as “unstable angina pectoris” but are now included in the spectrum of “acute coronary syndrome.” At AFIC, Musharraf was admitted to a coronary-care unit and received medications to stabilize his condition. Basic tests were then done. We do not have any details of these initial tests, but we do know that these excluded the possibility of an actual acute myocardial infarction or heart attack.

Subsequent diagnostic tests were also performed. Again, we do not have any details of what tests were done, but based on the reports submitted to the court, one thing is clear: besides having general problems that many people his age have, the important finding was that he has considerable calcium deposits in the arteries of his heart.

It would seem that the one important heart test Musharraf did go through at AFIC was a CT angiogram. This is primarily an advanced x-ray that besides providing a picture of the heart arteries also yields an assessment of the amount of calcium deposited in them. The higher the calcium score, the greater are the chances of having severe blockages of the arteries.

Many of us remember that during one of his visits to the U.S., then-president Musharraf made a mysterious side trip to middle-of-nowhere Paris, Texas, where Pakistani-American cardiologist Dr. Arjumand Hashmi runs a sophisticated cardiac center. It is possible but not confirmed that at that time Musharraf at least underwent a CT angiogram. When Dr. Hashmi now states that Musharraf has serious blockages in his heart arteries, he is probably comparing the calcium scoring done at his facility many years ago with the latest AFIC results.

Based on what is known, it would appear that Musharraf does indeed have considerable blockages of his heart arteries. The extent of these blockages is, however, being debated by people who don’t know the difference between a heart artery and a vein in the heart.

The latest question being raised by these armchair heart specialists is the question of an angiography. They claim Musharraf has refused to have an angiography. As someone who has seen thousands of angiography test results over my professional lifetime, and operated on a few thousand patients based on these results, I am entirely amused by this sudden expertise developed by media personalities and lawyers who have no idea what this test is all about.

Coronary angiography is a specialized test that requires the passage of a catheter or small plastic tube through the artery in the leg or the arm into a heart artery so that a special medicine can be injected and x-ray pictures can be taken to outline artery blockages. This is an invasive procedure. And like all invasive procedures it can only be performed if the patient agrees to go through with it. Medical ethics hold that it is entirely Musharraf’s right to refuse such a procedure. (Frankly, looking at the chief prosecutor in this case, my suggestion to Musharraf as a heart doctor would be to have a coronary angiogram done as soon as possible.)

AFIC is a pretty good place to take care of the problem of heart artery blockages. But, again, it is the patient’s sole right whether he wishes to seek further care from Ajmer Sharif or Paris, Texas. If a Pakistani court or a government official denies a patient that right and there happens to be an unfortunate outcome, will that court or government official then responsible be willing to accept the charge of being accessory to homicide?

Many pundits and politicians are of the opinion that Musharraf is lying, that he was never sick and sought refuge at the Army-run AFIC to avoid indictment. As far as the lying part goes, even the interior minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan has said that Musharraf’s health scare was genuine. Musharraf’s choice to opt for an Army hospital appears fairly obvious and far from sensational: as a former soldier, he obviously felt more comfortable being treated in an Army facility. After Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf chief Imran Khan fell off a forklift last year and required hospitalization for spine fractures, he ended up not in an orthopedic hospital but at his own hospital—a cancer hospital. This was because Khan was sure he would get the best possible care there. Patients prefer hospitals where they know the doctors involved and can expect good care, so it is entirely appropriate that Musharraf went to an Army hospital.

There is also a lot of reactive nonsense about Musharraf’s wanting to seek treatment abroad when there is “quality” medical care available in the country. Both Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif are known to visit London every so often for “routine” medical checkups. Since politicians don’t want people to know they are sick, there’s been no disclosure about the medical details of these checkups. And, of course, we all remember when Asif Ali Zardari as president developed neurological problems thought to be heart trouble and ended up in Dubai for diagnosis and treatment. There’s also the security issue. The chances of successful treatment and survival of Patient Musharraf, Al Qaeda and the Taliban’s most-wanted man, are far brighter abroad.

Hussain is a cardiac surgeon and editor-at-large of Newsweek Pakistan.


& they say PAKARMY not supporting him with their hearts?
here comes the blast, the heaviest of all, one & only "Xeric"
really a leathal deal?
my salutes to you sir!
BATMANS at sevice!
 
Last edited:
It is getting funny the dictator murderer of thousands of Pakistanis sealing Pakistan's fate with ill decisions is literally begging, he kept saying he elevated the status of Pakistan and gave it the best of economic era and yet he couldn't built a state of the art medical center for likes of him generals and politicians...something that would not have cost billions of dollars.
if its governing of a place, in which terrorists doing terrorism , & civillians getting killed ?
then ASIF ZARDARI, IMRAN KHAN, NAWAZ SHARIF all are gulity, & should be more charged then musharaf?
you are another of think takers, given the post without thinking?
guss tht was PTI eara post, 11 may,s worst ever defeat?
mien tey PM bana gaa? IK bhai? lolzzs

just send the guy, i'm sick of listening to news about him all the time, i want a show on real issues :hitwall:
pakistan real issuses?
ok TALIBAN KHAN & his accociation with terrorists, free offices?

...Coward...
yes you are, nothing new about it?

I don't know if I can agree with that. While there are some commoners that do support Musharraf, most of his support comes from the militarists and upper class. The working class and lower class are almost unanimously against him, and see his rule as more harmful than good.
yes working class are against him, because in his rule USD was 62 to ruppee?
come on, stop lying will you, S guy?
you got wht i mean? lolzzz
 
Last edited:
WDaF...??!! o_O

Aesa Salam to app kai Kisi Batman nai bhe nahi diya ho ga :D

I like Topi drama musharraf is playing. If his man enough like, Gen.Durrani (EX ISI DG), he should present himself in court or else army would get a stain on it's reputation that it produces coward generals
 
WDaF...??!! o_O

He is trying to respect you:woot:
On serious note,this is another topi drama.The problem is here that same article 6 applies upon Mr.Sharif.Our politicians are connossieur of lies.They have set a trap against Mr.Musharraf with only intention to humiliate him and in the name of law and constitution,they are settling their own personal vendetta,especially Mr.Sharif.
Thus in order to escape from this labyrinth,Mr.Musharraf must prove his severe medical condition.I have heard that he wasn't well treated,it was claimed earlier that Mr.Musharraf was forced to wake up for whole night,before the case hearing.However,I am sure that they will let him go after some constitutional drama.

-Regards
 
Aesa Salam to app kai Kisi Batman nai bhe nahi diya ho ga :D

I like Topi drama musharraf is playing. If his man enough like, Gen.Durrani (EX ISI DG), he should present himself in court or else army would get a stain on it's reputation that it produces coward generals
Well.it is simply known as 'tit for tat' analogy,ie dealing dramay baazi with dramay baazi,but still I don't think so that army medical faculty will be putting their reputation at risk.
 
Well.it is simply known as 'tit for tat' analogy,ie dealing dramay baazi with dramay baazi,but still I don't think so that army medical faculty will be putting their reputation at risk.

If Musharraf can face Bugti,Benazir,Lal Masjid cases with such uppity than why dramay bazi in this case? It means he knows, there is a real chance he can get convicted in this case
 
Back
Top Bottom