Pakistan's high court acquits Nawaz Sharif

[SSGPA1]

So does mine, if Parliament is failed to give the relief to the people, SC has all the right to intervene as per the constitution. Examples exist around the world even in India, the country we hate the most, where SC intervened and guided the Government to change their policies.

Only if govt. policy is in direct conflict with the constitution ... no matter what you say constitution is very clear in the jurisdictions.

 

[SSGPA1]

still their damage was a lot less than wat was bestowed upon us by intelligent dictators.

$12 Billion in international debt to $34 Billion in international debt.

For most part I have lived in US and Canada, I want democracy in Paksitan as much as you want democracy in Pakistan.

I support Musharraf because he is better than both Zardari and NS ... specially now that he is no longer part of the Pakistan Armed Forces.

If NS and Zardari have the right to get elected in this country with their colorful pasts (and probable present) then so does Musharraf.

 

[Skywalker]

What is next? Hang Musharraf?



May be, you r right ,that y Mushy left Pakistan and settled in London. He has bought a house of 1.4 million pounds in London and drives 7 series BMW and he has got 6 MI-5 agents with him all the time. Did he take political asylum in UK? Does Pak army Generals have that much of pay or he has also taste little part of billlion dollar Aid. This info was discussed in Geo disscussion forum Capital Talk by Hamid mir... if this news is true than iam shocked to know that musshy always said " Iam a soldier, i will never leave Pak" ........

Who provided you all these details ...RAW. give us a break.

BTW whats a big deal of having a 7 series BMW, maybe in India but not here.

 

[Patriot]

still their damage was a lot less than wat was bestowed upon us by intelligent dictators. zia ul haq gave us extremism and musharraf blessed us with a war (in which only muslims died) which was never ours.

Brother you can hate him for other things but WOT was totally out of his hands.You were either with America or against them.They would have bombed us back then we did not even have a single active nuke so what could we do against America?You speak with position of power and we had none.Our F16's were sitting ducks due to spares problems.We could not even fight with India let alone USA.Any other sane person would have accepted US requests.

 

[Xeric]

still their damage was a lot less than wat was bestowed upon us by intelligent dictators. zia ul haq gave us extremism and musharraf blessed us with a war (in which only muslims died) which was never ours.

Come on AJ, i am not a Gen Zia fan, nor i rate Gen Musharraf (coups) higher than the Parliament, but the fact remains that i hate our politicians-something like:"Not that I loved Caesar less, but I loved Rome more.”

i dont want to argue with respected AJ about what Zia or Musharraf did, but just for the sake of it; what would you have done had you been in Zia's place when the Reds entered Afghanistan and CIA was knocking our doors? And please dont blame this 'our' war on Musharraf, how could you?

 

[qsaark]

Only if govt. policy is in direct conflict with the constitution ... no matter what you say constitution is very clear in the jurisdictions.

Government policy IS in direct conflict with the basic rights described in article I and II.

 

[qsaark]

$12 Billion in international debt to $34 Billion in international debt.

Paid only through selling the national assets.

If NS and Zardari have the right to get elected in this country with their colorful pasts (and probable present) then so does Musharraf.

Except that neither NS nor Zardari commited high treason under article VI.

 

[qsaark]

....what would you have done had you been in Zia's place when the Reds entered Afghanistan and CIA was knocking our doors? And please dont blame this 'our' war on Musharraf, how could you?

Would have strengthened my ties with Russia and would have avoided any conflict just like we are doing now with USA. If we can ignore USA albeit of it is killing innocents in Waziristan, why we couldn’t avoid Russia back in 1979? Only because Zia was nothing more than a pawn of America and he needed American support to keep his illegitimate military Government in power.

 

[Patriot]

I recommend everyone to watch this and see how NS and CJ are hypocrites
Who approved Musharraf Martial Law: Ifthikar CH
Who gave Musharraf 2 years free rule in 2000: Ifthikar Ch
Who took oath under PCO of Musharraf in 1999: Ifthikar Ch
Who rejecetd all petetion signed against Musharraf until 2005- Ifthikar Ch
Just watch the whole video the guy makes damn good points.

 

[Kasrkin]

still their damage was a lot less than wat was bestowed upon us by intelligent dictators. zia ul haq gave us extremism and musharraf blessed us with a war (in which only muslims died) which was never ours.

During the time of military rulers the likes of Ayub Khan, Zia-ul-Haq, Pervez Musharraf Pakistan did undergo a lot of economic and social change but not all of it was bad. The economy did improve during their tenures, investment and development were impressive with all and Pakistan did fairly well for itself in the international scene. Pakistan also had to face unfortunate realities such as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan during Zia’s time, growth of Al-Qaeda and the WoT in Musharraf’s time. They made tough decisions, decisions that can be debated, but you can’t blame the whole course of Pakistan’s unfortunate turn of events on these few selected men. They tried to use the situation for Pakistan as best they could. Zia's policy resulted in some unfortunate side effects, for that he is condemned, Musharraf wanted to tackle some of these long fostering problems head on, but for that he is condemned as well. Don't you think that is an unreasonable and unfair way to look at things? Had NS been in power after 9/11, how do we know that he would’ve reacted any better to the pressure? He might've made more blunders. Things might’ve been much worse for all we know.

Pakistan did help the Mujahideen under Zia, sure, but Pakistan also helped the Taliban achieve power under BB, also the advent of religious, ethnic and sectarian terrorism in Pakistan only grew when NS was in charge. If these politicians were all so wise and self-less, they could’ve tried tackling any of these problems and shown longer term vision and leadership. Instead they were caught in their silly rivalries and long marches, not to mention all the deep corruption scandals. They never hesitated using the ISI for political ends and they didn’t make any of the institutional changes they rant about when not in power. Many were little more than authoritarian regimes, some like Bhutto were vicious dictators. Ofcourse military leaders are responsible for much of what has happened to Pakistan, but they’re far from the only ones.

Just a few thoughts.

 

[Xeric]

Would have strengthened my ties with Russia and would have avoided any conflict just like we are doing now with USA. If we can ignore USA albeit of it is killing innocents in Waziristan, why we couldn’t avoid Russia back in 1979? Only because Zia was nothing more than a pawn of America and he needed American support to keep his illegitimate military Government in power.

Strengthen ties with whom? An agressor?

i think you forgot that just after our independence we went into the American lap instead of the Russians.

And i'll leave this to your imagination; whether the Americans needed OUR 'support' more or was it the other way around.

 

[Patriot]

I'll disagree with you Engima.We were dumb that we stayed in America's lap even after 71.General Zia is the reason behind all the suffering on people of Pakistan.It was him who transformed Pakistan into a extremist society.He not only did that but also destroyed army, put his brother in law in charge of PAF which lowered the morale of several pilots.General Zia was a one bigoted General who wanted to stay in power.I completely agree with Qsaark General Zia and his cronies destroyed country from core..In fact had Zia not started creating trouble in Afghanistan we would never had seen Soviets in Afghanistan..Bhutto was on the path of creating good relations with Soviets.Anyway few more videos regarding the most honest institution of Pakistan.

 

[qsaark]

Strengthen ties with whom? An agressor?

i think you forgot that just after our independence we went into the American lap instead of the Russians.

And i'll leave this to your imagination; whether the Americans needed OUR 'support' more or was it the other way around.

So you see America as a liberator? I can't complaint, you are a Government servant, and being a loyal servant, you should speak the language of the Government you serve. I believe your activity on this forum is also under the magnifying glass of the ISI or MI.

Went into the lap of the America was again a wrong decision which set bad precedence.

It is not my imagination, it is a fact. Military dictators have always relied on US help more than the civilian Governments.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

NS and company will surely try. Lets roll the dice gents!

Nonetheless, there may perhaps be an argument for a 'staged' conviction.

Regardless of the mess made by the politicians in the run up to Musharraf's coup, it is factually correct that he took over the country unconstitutionally, and does technically deserve to be prosecuted for that crime.

Without Musharraf being prosecuted and sentenced for his 'crime', it can be argued that there is no deterrent to future unconstitutional measures by the military, which perhaps makes it necessary to create an example out of him.

Now to my point about 'staged conviction' - agreements can perhaps be made with other friendly states that could provide asylum/citizenship to Musharraf, give him time to settle his business and sell of most of his assets in Pakistan, and relocate to such a state.

Musharraf would then be tried in absentia, and likely convicted (given that his guilt is technically pretty clear cut). He would however remain safe in a mutually agreed nation, with no chances of extradition. Perhaps some years down the line a President can issue a pardon.

This might be one way of satisfying all sides.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Please stop using terms like bastard and what not when referring to personalities.

While you may not like XYZ individual, remember that there is a very good chance someone might be reading and respond who takes offense to your characterization of said personality.

I know many of you would be quite upset at Musharraf being called names, so try and understand how someone else might feel when you call Ansar Abbassi or others who oppose Musharraf names.

One can be critical and point out the flaws of personalities one disagrees with without resorting to swear words - it just degrades the forum. No one likes participating on a forum where posters start swearing and cussing whenever they have a disagreement, so keep it civil.

Infractions will be issued if this continues.