Victim of VIP protocol

[VCheng]

This is targeted at all of them, this case is just representative of the general attitude of the VIP's to the general public.

As long it is a targeted generally, I have no problem with it. All the VIPs are guilty of such behavior, equally.

 

[Djinn]

COAS, PM and President are legally entitled to this and are also ethically and logically justified, Bilawal Bhutto or Sherry Rehman are not.

How exactly the road blocks in the above mentioned cases are justified? If the poor ailing lady from the video had to wait it out for COAS, PM or President, would that have some how eroded her agony?

 

[karakoram]

Lanat on PPP and Little Dracula

 

[VCheng]

How exactly the road blocks in the above mentioned cases are justified? If the poor ailing lady from the video had to wait it out for COAS, PM or President, would that have some how eroded her agony?

Apparently, they are legally permitted.

 

[Jango]

How exactly the road blocks in the above mentioned cases are justified? If the poor ailing lady from the video had to wait it out for COAS, PM or President, would that have some how eroded her agony?

They couldn't be held accountable because they are legally justified for this under the pretext of security of the head of state etc. They have a public office for God's sake.

This Bilawal guy or Zardari don't. It ain't that difficult to comprehend.

The poor lady might not have had any comfort in that case either, but she wasn't being illegally denied a passage to a hospital because of the illegal use of force to block a road.

As long it is a targeted generally, I have no problem with it. All the VIPs are guilty of such behavior, equally.

Go and have a look at my first post and read the second line again please.

Apparently, they are legally permitted.

Not apparently, in reality.

Before the coming of Musharraf, it was only the President and PM, but after Mush the COAS came into the fold as well.

Along with them, the Chief Justice is also legally authorized to have a bullet proof car I think. Will have to double check on that.

 

[VCheng]

Go and have a look at my first post and read the second line again please.

Yes, I read it. I also expressed my views as "The assumption that things would be any different with a change of government may not be entirely correct.", since they are all a-55-hol-es, as you mention.

 

[Djinn]

They couldn't be held accountable because they are legally justified for this under the pretext of security of the head of state etc.

This Bilawal guy or Zardari don't. It ain't that difficult to comprehend.

The poor lady might not have had any comfort in that case either, but she wasn't being illegally denied a passage to a hospital because of the illegal use of force to block a road.



Go and have a look at my first post and read the second line again please.

So the issue under discussion is all about legalities and not the sufferings of the commoners. Yeah, point well made man.

They have a public office for God's sake.

You seriously think that God care's if it's the President or COAS of beloved Pak fauj at whose expense a precious (ordinary in your case) life was lost.......Do i need to remind of Hijat-ul Widaaz sermon, to ascertain if our own made designations are really that important?

 

[Jango]

So the issue under discussion is all about legalities and not the sufferings of the commoners. Yeah, point well made man.

You seriously think that God care's if it's the President or COAS of beloved Pak fauj at whose expense a precious (ordinary in your case) life was lost.......Do i need to remind of Hijat-ul Widaaz sermon, to ascertain if our own made designations are really that important?

We aren't discussing what's wrong and what's right in the eyes of Allah here.

If that's the case, why do we have mixed gender public places? Why do we have women without niqab roaming around? Why do we have interest in our economic system? I could go on and on.

let's not change the passage of discussion here.

Let's look at it this way.

If there is a petty criminal on the run in a local Mohalla. There are two cases:

1- The locals get him tied up, beat him and kill him.

2- The police get him, try him and kill him through the death penalty suppose.

#2 is the legal way, #1 is illegal. The guy got killed nonetheless. His family got pain nonetheless. But #1 is wrong, #2 is right.

Why?

Same logic applies here.

The poor lady in this case got blocked by an illegal obstruction. In the COAS or PM or President's case, it was not illegal and justified under our law.

I am not justifying the pain she suffered or anything, just saying that it's how the world works. We are not living in Utopia just so you know. Got a problem with it, change the law.

But that's just how it goes in this world. Nothing's fair.

Again, not justifying the pain she suffered, explaining the logic behind it. If it would have been my relative stuck behind the PM or COAS or Pres, I would have cursed them too...I would have thought "Fck the law" (Has actually happened to me once)...but hey, that's how it is.

 

[VCheng]

Got a problem with it, change the law.

What law needs changing here to prevent the kind of abuse shown in the video?

 

[livingdead]

vip culture is bad, but vip safety is important. I dont think IK would like to die on road without safety. besides your leader needs to work 24/7.

 

[Djinn]

What law needs changing here to prevent the kind of abuse shown in the video?

Some thing that seems legit is codified as a law, while the rest is all unlawful. It's amusing to see that in a "democratic" state, the brazen abuse of human dignity is justified under the pretense of selective "righteous VIP protocols".

 

[VCheng]

Some thing that seems legit is codified as a law, while the rest is all unlawful. It's amusing to see that in a "democratic" state, the brazen abuse of human dignity is justified under the pretense of selective "righteous VIP protocols".

Selective righteousness is just as useless as selective outrage.