Musharraf’s book-launch in September

[Lahori paa jee]

This is utter madness. Any goverment servant cannot have a side business. How can Mushy launch a book while he is still in uniform


Apart from that how about this picture on the book

 

[Neo]

Saturday, September 23, 2006javascript:; http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/print.asp?page=2006\09\23\story_23-9-2006_pg1_9

Daily Times Monitor

LAHORE: President General Pervez Musharraf’s claim on American television that the US threatened to bomb Pakistan “back to the stone age” unless it joined the fight against Al Qaeda was first revealed, and is fully illustrated, in his forthcoming book to be published on Monday, according to a report in the Times of India.

The report said that several people believed Musharraf’s claim was the best advance publicity possible for a volume of political memoirs. Journalists at The Times (London), which possess a copy of Musharraf’s book titled ‘In the Line of Fire’, told the Times of India that the memoirs went “into a lot of detail about Musharraf’s contacts with the US following the 9/11 attacks”.

The report said that Musharraf’s decision to reveal the American bombing threats in his autobiography was thought to be a PR-savvy judging of the overcrowded literary marketplace, where shock and awe was considered the best sales tactic.

Musharraf’s controversial assertion that former US deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage threatened Pakistan with bombs after 9/11 is to appear in the newspaper on Monday, adding to rising press and public interest in the book.

It quoted Pakistan-watchers as saying that America’s methods of extracting Pakistani support for the war on terror were likely to spark consternation after the world finally got to read Musharraf’s full account of panicky US actions after the 9/11 attacks. The book is scheduled to be officially released by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan.

The president’s publishers said they expected book “to do well in its genre of political memoirs”, it added.

Observers were quoted as saying that this could indicate that the president’s surprisingly un-diplomatic assertion about Armitage’s threats could have been part of a massive PR drive for the book.

Some, however, said Musharraf’s remarks could not have been entirely self-serving. They said Musharraf’s claim could have been a canny recognition that Bush had “unwittingly handed him a big PR gift for the forthcoming memoirs” by saying he would not hesitate to authorise American military action inside Pakistan if he had intelligence of Osama Bin Laden’s whereabouts, the report said. PR-strike or not, all eyes are focussed on Musharraf’s memoirs.


http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006\09\23\story_23-9-2006_pg1_9

 

[Awesome]

This is utter madness. Any goverment servant cannot have a side business. How can Mushy launch a book while he is still in uniform


Apart from that how about this picture on the book

What are you talking about? Everyone has sidebusinesses. They still got to make a living.

 

[Lahori paa jee]

What are you talking about? Everyone has sidebusinesses. They still got to make a living.

Perhaps none of your acquaintances has ever worked in a government job or you would have known what im talking about

Or if they have try asking them if they can have businesses apart from their jobs

 

[Awesome]

Bush has his company, Nawaz Sharif has his mills, Benazir has her everything...

Politicians all have businesses of their own. And it's perfectly legal...

 

[Lahori paa jee]

My dear Asim

Presidency and Premierships are public office while army chief is a government office and there is a hell of a difference in the two

Public office holders can have private businesses while a government servant cannot

This rule applies anywhere and everywhere in the world

 

[Awesome]

But he's also a President.

It's not like there's some hard and fast rule that you bend or break and its the end of the world.

But still an army man can't run his own business? If I have some money and I want to sell some eggs I can't? Because a business can be run by hired people too.

 

[Sid]

It's not like there's some hard and fast rule that you bend or break and its the end of the world.

Well certainly not in Pakistan's case. The constitution has no respect and is merely a toy in the hands of the power hungry.

 

[blain2]

such are the complexities of having one person holding 3 offices...as much as I like Musharraf, I think its time for him to give up the Army and with constitutional and legal guarantees be appointed the President with the NSC in place. This would ensure that the President is not left out and carries influence even with a civilian elected PM, the opposition and armed forces chiefs within the security council.

 

[Kaiser]

This book seems pretty interesting and should be a must read for any pakistani in this forum.

 

[Lahori paa jee]

But he's also a President.

It's not like there's some hard and fast rule that you bend or break and its the end of the world.

But still an army man can't run his own business? If I have some money and I want to sell some eggs I can't? Because a business can be run by hired people too.

But a government officer cannot hold a public office at the same time. One can do it but has wait for two years after retirement

Mushy has really messed up everything. He is the president and also getting the salary as army chief. This is a violation of constitution

I wonder if a government peon or chaprasi or driver or teacher or high ranking officers can do the same. Ofcourse if Mushy can do it why not others.

Why is it different for Mushy while everyone else has to abid by the rule

 

[Lahori paa jee]

such are the complexities of having one person holding 3 offices...as much as I like Musharraf, I think its time for him to give up the Army and with constitutional and legal guarantees be appointed the President with the NSC in place. This would ensure that the President is not left out and carries influence even with a civilian elected PM, the opposition and armed forces chiefs within the security council.

I see Mushys fate similar to Zia :GUNS: :army: . He will not give up uniform easily for he knows that his strength is army. The day he gives up his post his game would be over. Its going to be suicide.

 

[Srirangan]

Lahori,

Asim and many others do not believe in Civilian rule. Pakistan is being run like the ancient Sparta. A military state. Army is not for Pakistan, Pakistan is for the Army. It is really easy to then come to power. It goes a bit like this:

"Look India will attack you, Civilian politicians can't protect you, let the Army be in power"

This school of thought has been used for decades by not only Musharraf but all previous military dictators. Not just in Pakistan, but elsewhere too.

Hitler used: "Jews will take over the country"
Mao used: "Let's fight the imperialistic Americans"
etc. etc.

I'm not a student of political sciences, nor do I claim to know it all. But I guess this psyche is what drives Pakistan repeatedly into military rule.

Now don't blame the Army, it is for the people to break out of this psyche. Remember the Army itself is constituted by the people of Pakistan.

In India, class 4, everybody is taught basic civics. While I'm not the biggest fan of the Indian education system, but one thing it does is it seperates the following:

- Civilian Politics
- Beurocracy
- Judiciary
- Religion
- Military

All these critical components of any country need to be seperated. You need an impartial education system to seperate them in the minds of every Pakistani citizen.

Getting rid of Musharraf won't change a thing. After Musharraf there will be yet another American sponsored dictator. Or else there will be Civilian rule like at the times of BB and NS, but even back then the Army top brass dictated orders.

Yes, Lahori. NS came to power because of initial Army support. Even you cannot possibly deny that and not be lying. Same with BB, remember her hardline stance on Kashmir back in the early 90's. It was to please the Army.

If you need sustainable Civilian rule in Pakistan:

1. The people must really want it. Right now, they don't mind being ruled by an Army. Education reforms will help. You don't need to adopt the Indian/British education system, simple reforms in the Madrassa education system that Pakistan has will help. Every young student must know the role and limitations of civilian politics, local politics, beurocracy, military and judiciary.

Infact I think if madrassa's impart this knowledge, it will be very quickly accepted by the people.

2. Move Army headquarters far away from the Civilian capital. Which means either Rawalpindi will not be the Army HQ, or Islamabad should not be the Civilian HQ. As long as this is unchanged, every Civilian Govt. in Pakistan is just as good as an hostage.

These are some basic observations I've made. I'm no expert. I'm sure you can come up with better, more effective solutions for sustainable civilian rule in Pakistan.

 

[Srirangan]

But still an army man can't run his own business? If I have some money and I want to sell some eggs I can't? Because a business can be run by hired people too.

Asim you are imho over simplifying the issue. Running a business is not the problem. Running the business at the State's expense is the problem. Running a private business when you are supposed to be serving as a soldier, that would also be a problem.

Rule #1 of being a soldier anywhere in the world, is to obey orders. Even the greatest of General's even during WWII knew their limitations and obeyed orders. It is called a chain of command. If you break it, you have broken the system.

You break the chain of command in Pakistan, you have broken Pakistan. Systems should enevr be compromised. And people within the system should be bettered.

I'm not sure if you guys are aware, but back in the late 70's, Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was running high on the 71 victory. Around 75-77 she issued an emergency and took up semi dictatorial role. She compromized the system here in India. It is even today rememebered as an era of darkness in Indian political history.

The incident lead to the greatest ever defeat of Indira Gandhi's Congress Party. The first ever. That was the power of the System. Indira Gandhi tried to break the system,. the system broke her back.

Look at the great country's. For them their system is dearest. Look at the United States, they almost revere their constitution. Could a tearaway General assume power, proclaim himself President and change the constitution in America? Ordinary American citizens wouldn't allow it. Ditto in the U.K. They love their monarchial democracy. Nothing will change it.

Pakistan needs a system which enshrines civilian rule, and such a system must be acceptable to all. And nobody, not the Army, not the Talib's not even America should be able to change that system.

Only then would Pakistan emerge as a stable naton.

 

[Sid]

Only then would Pakistan emerge as a stable nation.

You mean a stable state or nation-state.