PPP and Pakistan Muslim League-N will be unable to impeach President Pervez-Zaradari

[roadrunner]

The "masterminds" behind such bombings are obviously not 16 year olds. But it is so easy to find such dopey foolish kids around that one has to admit the enemy within. Mosabja, though too cowardly to carry out such an act himself, is the classic example of the illogical, pus-dribbling illogical thinking kid, who in their uncontrolled hatred of Musharraf is blinded by the thief that has just sneaked in the door.

 

[MOSABJA]

What if Mushi join PPP. Or next President comes from PPP ?....I think 58-2B will be there for next thousand year. lolz

Right now Mushahid hussaind Sayyed the secretary general of PML Q and a SENATOR has said that


He and his group of senators will support the removal of 58 2b.

To be honest I dont see 58 2b for more than 2 MONTHS.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I personally don't support 58 -2(b), as long as the remaining powers that have been transferred to the President remain unaltered. For example, it is important to leave the powers to appoint military chiefs in the hands of the President. Similarly the powers to appoint SC judges should remain with the President. The prime minister and parliament can then get on with running the country.

 

[roadrunner]

Obviously, being the geniuses you all are, you failed to realize Article 58, 2 (b) does not exist in the Pakistani Constitution.

True the Eighth Amendment did bring in 58 2 (b), but then the Thirteenth Amendment omitted 58 2 (b). Therefore it does not exist.

What does exist is Article 58 (3), which is a new amendment.

"(3) The President in case of dissolution of the National Assembly under paragraph (b) of clause (2) shall, within fifteen days of the dissolution, refer the matter to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court shall decide the reference within thirty days whose decision shall be final".

So Musharraf does have the power to legally dissolve the NA (which hopefully he will if it turns out to be crooked), though it needs validating by the Supreme Court (which is precisely why the crooks in power want the old judges back). The lies people do weave for money

 

[Proud to be Pakistani]

Obviously, being the geniuses you all are, you failed to realize Article 58, 2 (b) does not exist in the Pakistani Constitution.

True the Eighth Amendment did bring in 58 2 (b), but then the Thirteenth Amendment omitted 58 2 (b). Therefore it does not exist.

What does exist is Article 58 (3), which is a new amendment.

"(3) The President in case of dissolution of the National Assembly under paragraph (b) of clause (2) shall, within fifteen days of the dissolution, refer the matter to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court shall decide the reference within thirty days whose decision shall be final".

So Musharraf does have the power to legally dissolve the NA (which hopefully he will if it turns out to be crooked), though it needs validating by the Supreme Court (which is precisely why the crooks in power want the old judges back). The lies people do weave for money

Completely agree with you RR.

That is the game of Politics..... But if people think that Army is going to let the politicians tear our country apart then they will be made wrong by General Kiyani ....

 

[Samudra]

What purpose will impeaching Musharaf serve now ?

 

[Proud to be Pakistani]

Just to get all of Pakistan in hand!

Power hungry politicians will ruin Pakistan and let another Martial Law follow in to put them out of Power!

 

[Samudra]

You people are looking for a utopian government.

Let those looting the country complete their term and when elections come next boot them out with such force that they should think twice about corruption.

Instead the Army coming out to save the country will never lead to political stability. It would directly impact economic growth. Meanwhile build strong institutions like our election commission. You guys just destroyed the judiciary - not that they were angels though. But political stability is so so far from Pakistan right now.

 

[dabong1]

How very democratic of you. It's a wonder why you support the undemocratic Taliban really isn't it? Can you call tht selective in the least? .

I think i will support the pro indian "democratic" NA over the pro pakistan taliban......does that make you happy?

If the main complaint you have is that he took power by force, then what do you say to the alternative that the country default if he did not take power in 1999? You will probably deny it would have defaulted, but it clearly was heading to a debt repayment default with no reserves..

Sorry i forgot that pakistan was about to collapse and mushy came at just the last second and saved pakistan.......keep dreaming

Zardari has already called it his war. BB was willing to let American troops onto Pakistani soil. Cuckoo land must be fun this time of year since you think that Zardari would not want strikes on militants hiding away in Mosques. Soon as his government is up and running, you'll see the same procedure as before going on, and then you'll probably re-write your story once again.

So even after i have said that i support Nawaaza you still insist on linking me to asifoo.
Both AZ and NS would have starved the lal masjid mob,not killed them.
When either AZ or NS do something i consider unmoral/undemocratic then i will switch my alligance......thats the beauty of being democratic.
But you will not change your stance on mushy even if he is wrong....brainwashed thats what i call it.

 

[HAIDER]

Samundra ji i am agree with your opinion. I think best solution is free media. Even NGOs are supporting the parties or lawyer campaign is backed by politicians. Next few months are tough, then dust will settle down and people see the real faces.

 

[dabong1]

Yep, you still haven't grasped the definition of a convicted criminal it seems. Convicted criminal = Zardari = Baad.
Musharraf = no convicted criminal = Betttter. :

Who let this bad man out of jail?..........mushy.

Got it? I can't explain it any simpler.

One chose to serve his country in war, the other chose to loot his country till default and spend it lavishly on mansions round the world. Noone forced either to do it, yet you somehow turn a blind eye to Zardari's looting. Why is that I wonder?

Nawaaza babu is my choice for leader of pakistan.........i dont need to defend zardari.....you need to defend mushy for letting this convict free.



"Got it? I can't explain it any simpler."

 

[A.Rahman]

Right now Mushahid hussaind Sayyed the secretary general of PML Q and a SENATOR has said that


He and his group of senators will support the removal of 58 2b.

To be honest I dont see 58 2b for more than 2 MONTHS.

what is 58 2B ?

 

[Spring Onion]

the PML-Q Senators will only support removal of 58- 2B Only IF Musharraf is NOT the president otherwise i dont see they are going to support its removal.

 

[MOSABJA]

Mushahid hussain has already said that he and his group will support removal of 58 2 b.Nelofar bakhtiar has also formed a forward block of 11 senators.

Lets see will the opposition's strength climb from 42 to 66 on this issue or not.

Even if it is not removed now. Then as Jana said that Qs would support it after removal of Musharraf.

Which I think could be removed by either restoring judiciary and let it decide the eligibility of Mush.

OR

By impeaching him.Which will not require 2/3rd of senate but COMBINED 2/3rd

 

[roadrunner]

Who let this bad man out of jail?..........mushy.

Got it? I can't explain it any simpler.

Obviously you don't. It was the judiciary that gave him the jail-term, not Musharraf. Since Pakistan's judiciary (in fact under Iftikhar Chaudary) was supposedly independent, Musharraf had nothing to do with his release.

Nawaaza babu is my choice for leader of pakistan.........i dont need to defend zardari.....you need to defend mushy for letting this convict free.

What is the difference between NS and Zardari. They're both proven criminals. Zardari went to jail, NS to Saudi

BBC News | SOUTH ASIA | Life sentence for Sharif