Well since you claimed that Uncle Sam's nod and his wallet orchestrated the lawyer uprising the burden of proof is on you, not me to prove that the lawyers had absolutely no savings or employment since March 2007. How did you find out that the CIA put these lawyers on the payroll, did a little birdie whisper it in your ear? Oh and besides the fact that lawyers are famous for amassing wealth, Aitezas Ahsan should have career wealth as well as pension payments, am I right? So please explain how the CIA seduced these lawyers to all of a sudden become the eye of the storm that blew Mushy over.
It's clever deduction. I'm not taking CIA to court to present concrete evidence, but I'm public, and I'm voicing the public opinion.
As the story goes: Musharraf plays nice with America and everything is good. Musharraf goes against America, then everything is bad.
Okay. I know that, so you do admit that Hamid Gul is definately not on the CIA payroll, correct?
Don't know.
Hamid Gul is one of Mushy's most outspoken critics and openly calls him an American stooge. The reason I mentioned Hamid Gul is because he is the most vocal and visible Gernail who wanted to end Mushy's rule and replace him with a civilian elected ruler because he was totally disgusted with the way Mushy appeared to roll over for the US.
Ya exactly. He was a Mullah, he wanted him out. He would say anything! What credibility does a Musharraf hater have?
In my opinion Hamid Gul was a lot more effective in building up dissent against Mushy and in fact he was arrested on Mushy's orders during the emergency crackdown. So are you going to say Hamid Gul was on the CIA payroll too?
Actually he was a nobody...
Step back a minute here, stop going off on tangents and nitpicking on irrelevent trivia that doesn't really matter. I am arguing the following points in my timestamped commentary on Zaid Hamid's two videos here:
1. Ahmed Qureshi is an open supporter of Mushy. A die hard advocate. No doubt about that right? All he ever does is promote and defent Mushy. Sometimes he pretends not to when he plays devil's advocate with one of his shill guests, namely Zaid Hamid in this episode of his show. I will repeat my point that such a fanatic Mushy fan would never allow anyone critical of Mushy to appear on his show. Yet Zaid Hamid did. That is the whole point--I am trying to show Zaid Hamid pretends to be neutral but is actually in the Mushy/ISI camp.
No actually thats the difference with fanatic mushy fans and fanatics in general.
Musharraf allowed his own criticism. I can't be a Mushy fan without supporting freedom of speech.
2. Ahmed Qureshi claims that Mushy is clashing with the US/CIA by consistently resisting US pressure to recognize Israel. Now I don't want to go off on tangents about Israel's recognition and the benefits to Pakistan--I really don't care if Israel is "recognized" or when it happens. What I care about here is that Ahmed Qureshi claimed that Mushy for whatever reasons stubbornly resisted recognizing Israel and then Ahmed Qureshi sneakily slips in that Mushy "allowed Pak and Israeli foreign ministers to shake hands" as if that was a big bold step for Mushy, like walking a tightrope. Then to contradict this little fairytale by Ahmed QureshiI provided the PakTribune link which has all the details of Mushy getting cushy with Shimon Peres. Now bear in mind this so called intelligence expert Zaid Hamid was sitting right in front of Ahmed Qureshi and endorsing this deception. That is the point--that Ahmed Qureshi made nonsense up about Israel purely to create a false impression about Mushy clashing with Washington over the Israel issue.
No actually you just over simplified the events over an 8 yr rule. Musharraf offered recognition of Israel but put in conditions. Musharraf never recognized Israel because the conditions were not met. Musharraf tried to recognize Israel.
If that's what he said, then that's accurate. Why are you ripping on someone for being accurate?
3. Ahmed Qureshi very clearly asks Zaid Hamid at 3:40 in the first video that despite the fact that Mushy is accused of being a stooge in reality he was actually fighting against the US in the interest of pakistan[implied]. Zaid Hamid ultimately agrees with it after spinning it in a more palateable fashion to a sceptic audience.
Again so? He's pointing out you all wrong because of the reasons mentioned above!!
4. Swat. Regardless of your or my personal opinion it is clear that the blame for Swat was spread more than 10 years back by these two. I mentioned it not to start a tengential argument over Swat but just to illustrate these these two are just sitting there and giving Mushy a clean chit on issue after issue after issue after issue. The way they converse is ridiculous too with Ahmed Qureshi playing devil's advocate against his boss Mushy
No they are throwing the water on a horny lynch mob's groin areas. Musharraf didn't bring in militancy, he fought it!
Militancy fought back. Still doesn't make Musharraf wrong.
This is an open secret so no I don't need to provide proof as it has already been provided and accepted right here, as a matter of fact there were threads made about predators being stationed in Pakistan under CIA control. You seem to have a very short memory.
Right the burden of proof is only going to be one me. Do you really need a base for a UAV? Why can't they fly them off the airstrips in Afghanistan?
Good point. Let Zaid Hamid describe how the CIA controls political parties too. Good point. Why doesn't Zaid Hamid talk about the specifics of how the CIA/MOSSAD/WEST controls Pakistan's economy, trade, political parties
bribing.
AND secret services and military.
Now I never said that.
Now why doesn't Zaid spend one minute giving details about that while he spends hours on "the new world order" wreaking havoc over the last 500 years. And most of his "economic terorism" series is ripped off documentaries like "the money masters" and other works like that.
Ok you can argue copyright infringements. But New World Order is an old phrase... I don't think anyone holds an IPR on that.
He ripped all of that off documentaries and none of those docus mentioned Pakistan, is that the problem? Or is it because he does not want to educate his gullible viewers on exactly how their politicians, military and economy is hijacked? Can any of Zaid Hamid's fans answer that?
Seriously not a Zaid Hamid fan. But I agree with him that this government's a sell out to UAE, Saudi and the US.
Wait eight years till our public realizes and they'll be out on the streets again...
you are so confused dear maqsad on the one hand you are terming the analysis on the basis of research work already done while on the other hand you are saying :
and she can trace IP addresses as well.. What more can i say.
(gues what that something could be) after which he ran away to USA.
