British newspaper uses strong language against the dictator http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/11/09/dl0902.xml](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/11/09/dl0902.xml)
Despite George W Bush’s rhetoric about freedom, the struggle against terrorism is provoking a reaction familiar from the Cold War and nowhere is that clearer than over Pakistan. In the old parlance, General Pervez Musharraf is "our sonofa***". He has failed to stamp out extremist groups and close the madrassas that inspire them. He has allowed the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan to fall into the hands of assorted jihadis. And he has sacked independent-minded judges for fear that the Supreme Court declare illegal his re-election as president last month.**
Yet, despite this combination of incompetence and brutality, America and Britain continue to back him as head of what has a strong claim to be the most dangerous country in the world.
In order to broaden the government’s political base, their plan is for the general to doff his army uniform later this month and enter into a power-sharing arrangement with Benazir Bhutto, leader of the Pakistan People’s Party, after general elections in February.
If that ever comes to pass, it will bring together a soldier whose popularity has plummeted and a politician whose standing has been undermined by her willingness to cut a deal with him. And the prospects for its lasting are slim: Miss Bhutto and the military are like oil and water. In short, the relationship between Gen Musharraf and the West is bankrupt. Valued as an ally after 9/11, he is now part of the problem. Under his dictatorship, Pakistan has become an increasingly ungovernable country in which moderate, secular forces have been sidelined to the advantage of the Islamists. **
An alternative – an alliance between General Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani, the army chief designate, and Miss Bhutto’s secular rival, Nawaz Sharif – seems neither imminent nor especially enticing. But that should not blind Britain and America to the fact that their "sonofa***" in Pakistan is a spent force.
Daily Telegraph declines comment on expulsion of journalists http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5ixdfeGc1NnHj2wDp-jfgmqdFNoug](http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5ixdfeGc1NnHj2wDp-jfgmqdFNoug)
LONDON (AFP) — The Daily Telegraph said it could not immediately comment on a report that three of its journalists were ordered out of Pakistan on Saturday for a strong attack on President Pervez Musharraf.
State television in Pakistan reported that the three had been ordered to leave within 72 hours for using “foul and abusive language” against its leadership.
The report came after an editorial in the newspaper which was sharply critical of Britain’s and the United States’ relationship with Musharraf.
“In short, the relationship between General Musharraf and the West is bankrupt,” it read.
“Valued as an ally after 9/11, he is now part of the problem.”
The newspaper also described Musharraf as “a spent force” and said he had shown a combination of “incompetence and brutality”.
They should have been courtmartialled, not deported.
And Pakistani friends rejoicing, they didnt insult your hated Mush, they insulted Pakistan.
What makes u think they'll have better language or more respect when there are so called elected leaders like ur favourite BB, NS, Altaf, Wali, Imran and Fazal, even then medling in our affairs and shredding our dignity in western newspapers wont exactly cease.
So in ur hate for Mushdont forget that in future when its any of the above mentioned and not Mush and Army, the insults will be same.
So praise whichever side you like,it shows how one thinks of Pakistan.
But believe you me the papers would never ever use such foul language against democratically elected leaders. Despite how bad Nawaz and BB were, none of the British papers ever used such strong language against them, why because the West and the Western media will only ever really accept elected leaders and not military dictators. If Mush is some times in the news in the British press, it is because he's seen as a good lackey in the war on terror. Noone gives him any importance otherwise simply because he's not elected and the West equates democracy with civilisation and freedom of speech amongst other things. In their eyes even the worst form of democracy is better than the best dictatorship.
Although I don't agree with name-calling per se (and none of us should if we are truly educated) even in all this abusive language, there is a cue for Mush and his like. The West and the Western media are sending a clear message here, that dictators should never (and very rightly) be given the same status as democratically elected leaders however flawed their governance. You have to earn respect in this world.
But believe you me the papers would never ever use such foul language against democratically elected leaders. Despite how bad Nawaz and BB were, none of the British papers ever used such strong language against them, why because the West and the Western media will only ever really accept elected leaders and not military dictators. If Mush is some times in the news in the British press, it is because he's seen as a good lackey in the war on terror. Noone gives him any importance otherwise simply because he's not elected and the West equates democracy with civilisation and freedom of speech amongst other things. In their eyes even the worst form of democracy is better than the best dictatorship.
Although I don't agree with name-calling per se (and none of us should if we are truly educated) even in all this abusive language, there is a cue for Mush and his like. The West and the Western media are sending a clear message here, that dictators should never (and very rightly) be given the same status as democratically elected leaders however flawed their governance. You have to earn respect in this world.
Western media just need a reality check they are having honey moon with BB at the moment ....will wake up soon :)
oh btw I just noticed that people who used to trash western media article full of praise for Mush are now quoting the same papers ;)
Exactly, if these same papers say anything bad about their taliban heroes they will call the west as kafir crusaders who lied about iraq wmd etc. etc.. ;)