Getting better?

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
21

beginin of this year i visited pakistan after 4 years.. and to tell u the truth. the difference i saw bettween 1999 and 2003 was huge. The gulliyan/alies have been remade, new roads, so your doesnt go currupt. And my cuz works in Lahore stock exchange, and he was telling the difference between when musharaff took control.

in 1999, pakistan had nothin in back, and by the international commusinty, was goin to be called a third world, backward country, but soon as Musharaf took over... we are making profit.. in 1999 the amount of access to computers to general public was unseen. some ppl didnt even know what computer was. I know that most guys who go to caf'es use them for wrong purpose, but atleast they....well learned something... So form what i can sey... a huge diffeerence.

Corrupition?... well u have to start from urself.. then blame others... and by the way.. most of uus who live in west.. wont know how much better it has become.. ask teh ppl who ;ive their.. every industry.. Graphics even is havin best time.

Allah hafiz

22

A large number of Musharraf’s original (post 99 and pre-election) team is not corrupt. this is an article on Shaukat Aziz by BusinessWeek.

:slight_smile:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/02_06/b3769620.htm

Can’t speak for India, but I do agree with those who say corruption is still a menace in Pakistan. Not at the highest level, as it used to be, but still flourishing at the lower level.

23

long live Musharraf!
those who are in a state of confusion would understan in time who the best leader for pakistan has been. while those who dont want to accept, must have their reason, like frozen bank accounts full of looted wealth. illegally owned plots of land taken back by the govt. these ppl are clear enemies of the state! they are no diff from benazir and sharif!

24

A question for my own education: What about all the corruption that Musharraf led administration did in last year's referendum and this year's election? The rigging and horse trading is beyond doubt. If we assume that the general situation is really improving in Pakistan (I am really happy if it is and I pray to Allah for more of it!), do the ends justify the means that Gen. Sb. has used to stay in power?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Haris Zuberi: *
long live Musharraf!
those who are in a state of confusion would understan in time who the best leader for pakistan has been. while those who dont want to accept, must have their reason, like frozen bank accounts full of looted wealth. illegally owned plots of land taken back by the govt. these ppl are clear enemies of the state! they are no diff from benazir and sharif!
[/QUOTE]

25

What are the key factors behind the economic improvement? Are they long term?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
Well, economy is really booming. Real estate prices are through the roof. Most businessmen are really happy with their businesses these days. KSE is on a record-breaking streak. I am sure education etc is also on the rise. So, yes, all that is doing well.

My point was about corruption.
[/QUOTE]

26

well ramyssys
is there any real proof that the elctions and referendum were rigged? for all i know, it's just another stunt by anti musharraf i.e. anti army and anti pakistan lobby to defgame the current setup which doesnt allow them to continue with damaging the country at free will for personal gains.
and if, someone does have proof that the elections and referendum were rigged, does anyone have proof that the elctions that brought nawaz sharif to power in 96 were not rigged? or the ones before that which brought benazir to power were not rigged? or the ones before that and the ones before that...?
in thw ider picture, it doesnt matter who rules, waht matters is what theuy do to the country. and as far as i can see, this govt. is doing better to the country thatn any govt has ever done.

27

:) Do you think that "the patriots" defaction from PPP to let the Q-league form the government was for nothing? That is just one small example of how the whole process was manipulated for Musharraf's own interests. As for the referendum last year -- do you think more than 99% of Pakistanis really wanted Musharraf in power (as the results suggested)?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Haris Zuberi: *
well ramyssys
is there any real proof that the elctions and referendum were rigged? for all i know, it's just another stunt by anti musharraf i.e. anti army and anti pakistan lobby to defgame the current setup which doesnt allow them to continue with damaging the country at free will for personal gains.
and if, someone does have proof that the elections and referendum were rigged, does anyone have proof that the elctions that brought nawaz sharif to power in 96 were not rigged? or the ones before that which brought benazir to power were not rigged? or the ones before that and the ones before that...?
in thw ider picture, it doesnt matter who rules, waht matters is what theuy do to the country. and as far as i can see, this govt. is doing better to the country thatn any govt has ever done.
[/QUOTE]

28

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ramyssysIX: *
:) Do you think that "the patriots" defaction from PPP to let the Q-league form the government was for nothing? That is just one small example of how the whole process was manipulated for Musharraf's own interests. As for the referendum last year -- do you think more than 99% of Pakistanis really wanted Musharraf in power (as the results suggested)?

[/QUOTE]

Changing people's loyalties with the lure of ministries and high posts, whats new with that? Can you prove that its legally/politically/ethically wrong? i am sure this practise goes on in a lot of countries.

The referendum was a disaster. the man accepts that himself. Get over it. :)

29

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ChthonicPowers: *

Changing people's loyalties with the lure of ministries and high posts, whats new with that? Can you prove that its legally/politically/ethically wrong?
[/QUOTE]

if nothing wrong with this lotacracy then what was the need for Musharraf to jump in from skies?? after all the reason he touted much for his coup was to cleanse the political system of the rot that was prevalnet before. Much of his diatribe against politicians was based on the lota culture that he vowed to make disappear .. and look now .. he's using the same lota culture to impose yet another crooked & corrupted bunch of worms on people of Pakistan.

And yes ... changing party loyalties was indeed legally wrong under the constitution which this tinpot self-styled savior held in partial abeyance ... yet another first one .. to put away only the clauses of constitution that were coming in his way .... setting the new definitions of a democratic set up ...eh!!

30

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *

if nothing wrong with this lotacracy then what was the need for Musharraf to jump in from skies?? after all the reason he touted much for his coup was to cleanse the political system of the rot that was prevalnet before. Much of his diatribe against politicians was based on the lota culture that he vowed to make disappear .. and look now .. he's using the same lota culture to impose yet another crooked & corrupted bunch of worms on people of Pakistan.

And yes ... changing party loyalties was indeed legally wrong under the constitution which this tinpot self-styled savior held in partial abeyance ... yet another first one .. to put away only the clauses of constitution that were coming in his way .... setting the new definitions of a democratic set up ...eh!!
[/QUOTE]

The anti-lota bill was passed by nawaz sharif for his personal gains. Taking away people's freedom to change parties is just one more examples of the democracy prevalent in Pakistan before Musharraf. You think this law represented a democratic government? You may disagree, but I think it represented an insecure government unwilling to lose its majority, and power.

I am quoting the 7 points agenda put forward by Gen. Musharraf soon after he seized power.

[quote]
* In an addresss to the Nation on October 18, General Musharraf set a seven-point agenda to revive the economy. The points are :*

      o Rebuilding national confidence and morale,
      o Strengthening federation, remove inter-provincial disharmony and restore national cohesion,
      o Revive economy and restore investor confidence,
      o Ensure law and order and dispense speedy justice,
      o Depoliticise state institutions,
      o Devolution of power to the grass-roots level and
      o Ensure swift and across the board accountability.

[/quote]

I see no mention of lotacracy anywhere. You just put words into his mouth and came up with the idea of Musharraf vowing to cleanse the system of lotas. In fact the only reference to the political system was made because of the concentration of power in the center. He promised to change that. He delivered.

And lets not get into the reasons for musharraf to revolt. We all know, to a great extent, what happened back then. The mere fact that he stopped over in Karachi for almost 7 hours before coming to islamabad suggests that he had no idea what was going on, and had no plans to over throwing the government.

31

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ChthonicPowers: *

The anti-lota bill was passed by nawaz sharif for his personal gains. Taking away people's freedom to change parties is just one more examples of the democracy prevalent in Pakistan before Musharraf.
[/QUOTE]

people's freedom has nothing to do with changing parties only when few brief cases loaded with hard cash change hands and that what the bill was more aimed at, to put a gag at horse trading at those critical juncutures such as government formaiton, casting vote of confidence etc

The irony of the matter is that same anti-lota clause of the constitution was held in abeyance during formation of government to allow lotas & ghorras to cross the floor but as soon as the sham "elected" government was put in place, suddenly the floor crossing clause was reinstated - why? was it Musharraf's apprehension that all those crook horses might break loose from the king's party upon offered a bigger brief case

[QUOTE]
You think this law represented a democratic government? You may disagree, but I think it represented an insecure government unwilling to lose its majority, and power
[/QUOTE]

when there's a way to cheat, there's a law to counter it, how else you suggest stop horse trading & lota culture?

[QUOTE]
I see no mention of lotacracy anywhere. You just put words into his mouth and came up with the idea of Musharraf vowing to cleanse the system of lotas. In fact the only reference to the political system was made because of the concentration of power in the center. He promised to change that. He delivered
[/QUOTE]

If you think Musharraf never vowed to produce a clean & real democractic set up, then let me give you a few quotes taken from his various speeches over the years. They're recorded on GOP website hence authentic.

[QUOTE]
*President's Address to the Nation (29 April 2002) *

  • He said a new political era would be ushered after the Referendum and General Elections.
  • The Referendum will be held in a free, transparent and fair manner.
  • A real democracy based on the Islamic injunctions would be restored. [/QUOTE]

[what does real democracy mean in Musharraf's book? put all the same plunderers, looters & crooks under a different garb and .. voila .. we've real democracy??]

[QUOTE]
President's Question Answer Session with BBC World

KARACHI (Pakistan), Sept 5 (APP) - President General Pervez Musharraf has said that his Government is tailoring democracy to match the country’s needs and requirements.
“There is no fixed formula for democracy around the world. I am trying to tailor democracy according to the needs of Pakistan,” he said.
“The looters and plunderers will not be allowed to take part in the elections. Those who looted and plundered the country and had two chances to govern but failed, will not be allowed to take part in the elections”, he said. “They have no place to govern again,” the President said amid clapping from the audience
[/QUOTE]

so now that Chaudry's of Gujrat, Sheikh Rashid Amed, Akhtar Rehman Malik and the likes are again back on stage, that surely would mean they're clean & innocent like angels ... na??

[quote]
President’s Press Conference (August 21, 2002)

The President said political restructuring was one of the four priority areas identified by his Government in 1999, the other three being economic revival, good governance and poverty alleviation. "I and my Government had always been a firm believer in the true and not the sham democracy." Under the political restructuring, he said it was decided to have a bottom-up approach, and hence, the plan of Local Government
[/quote]

sham democracy vs real democracy, that was one of his most quipped mantra he used as an excuse to jump in from the skies.

32

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *

people's freedom has nothing to do with changing parties only when few brief cases loaded with hard cash change hands and that what the bill was more aimed at, to put a gag at horse trading at those critical juncutures such as government formaiton, casting vote of confidence etc

The irony of the matter is that same anti-lota clause of the constitution was held in abeyance during formation of government to allow lotas & ghorras to cross the floor but as soon as the sham "elected" government was put in place, suddenly the floor crossing clause was reinstated - why? was it Musharraf's apprehension that all those crook horses might break loose from the king's party upon offered a bigger brief case.

when there's a way to cheat, there's a law to counter it, how else you suggest stop horse trading & lota culture?
[/QUOTE]

You think anyone can give a better offer to any politician than the military with its unlimited resources? If Nawaz could give one brief case full of cash, I am sure Musharraf has had at his disposal two even before he siezed power.

Personally, i couldn't care less if Musharraf had to hang a politican or two to keep his camp running, let alone floor crossing. What has these politicans given us anyway? If you'd read my earlier posts you'd see I agree with a certain person who equated politicians to jokers.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *

If you think Musharraf never vowed to produce a clean & real democractic set up, then let me give you a few quotes taken from his various speeches over the years. They're recorded on GOP website hence authentic.

[what does real democracy mean in Musharraf's book? put all the same plunderers, looters & crooks under a different garb and .. voila .. we've real democracy??]

so now that Chaudry's of Gujrat, Sheikh Rashid Amed, Akhtar Rehman Malik and the likes are again back on stage, that surely would mean they're clean & innocent like angels ... na??

sham democracy vs real democracy, that was one of his most quipped mantra he used as an excuse to jump in from the skies.
[/QUOTE]

When he said real democracy, it meant devolution of power to the grass root levels. that is real democracy where people have access to their representatives. And that is what affects the lives of most people, directly.
Not floor crossing. If a government can function properly with the help of floor crossing, then be it. But if the government isn't doing anything, even after having all the powers, as we've seen happen with previous governments, then something has to be changed.

And how can you blame Musharraf when people chose these plunderers? You can blame Musharraf if the men that he chose turned out to be robbers. And even if we do assumefor a moment that Musharraf chose all these plunderers, what alternates did he have? Where does he get new politicians? Your critisicm appears to belong to that set of people who criticise just for the heck of it, and then dont give any solutions for the problems. What good is a doctor who can point out the problem, (not that floor crossing is a problem for anyone in the bigger scheme of things) but not cure it?

Edit: let me also clarify for one last time: He didn't jump from the skies. He was forced to do what he did. lets be honest here. What would you have done if were the COAS, and the same thing happened to you? i would've done the same as Musharraf did.

Moreover, the way (y)our beloved democracies were robbing the country, we would've defaulted twice by now. Instead of ragging him incessantly, you should be thankful he took over.

33

[QUOTE]
Personally, i couldn't care less if Musharraf had to hang a politican or two to keep his camp running, let alone floor crossing. What has these politicans given us anyway?
[/QUOTE]

So in essence, you’re saying you don’t have any problem with corruption & lota culture as long as it keeps the ball rolling?? That’s exactly what was going on even before Musharraf, why do we need yet another tinpot napolean in shining armor who’d burn up Rs 2billion of our money for a sham referendum and then use the crutches of same plunderers, looters & thugs for his own political career? so where’s the change after almost 4 yrs now??

Horse trading/floor crossing was one major reason for weak & vulnerable governments of 90s. On one hand you talk about your desire to have a genuine & so called grass root level democracy but in the same breath you don’t have any issue with lotas’ loyalties being bought off with the lures of cash and ministry offers, then again I’d have to ask you the same question: why Musharraf had to jump in from the skies :) was it for his mock desire of a clean political system or was it due to the fact that this time his own job was on the line when NS fired him?

[quote]
When he said real democracy, it meant devolution of power to the grass root levels. that is real democracy where people have access to their representatives. And that is what affects the lives of most people, directly.
Not floor crossing
[/quote]

not quite just that. Read his excerpts again. He also promised to keep those plunderes, looters & thugs of the past away, those who in his own words were given chance twice & they failed. And now you see the same opportunist maliks, chaudrys, khokars, & awans been baptized by our holy Caeser for his not so holy political gimmick, all under the garb of “real democracy” …thanks but no thanks …. this “real democracy” has been pulled on us often by our past tinpot napoleons, one called it basic democracy, the other collected his own shoe shiners under the dome of mujlis –e shoora. And the same shoe shiners & opportunists have now lined up to catch some crumbs from Musharraf’s table. So where’s the change after almost 4 yrs now??

And now after about 2 yrs of grass root level democracy, how the situation has improved for the masses?? Has law & order been improved? Has police become more efficient & people friendly? Has KESCE in Karachi really got its acts together? Have road & sewer systems been fixed anywhere in Karachi? Can you get your driving license renewed w/o bribing and can you get your utility bill complaints fixed w/o having to run from pillar to post w/ no avail ??? Do people really have access to “their representatives”? you just have to look at their performance in the aftermath of monsoon havoc in Sindh and more so in Karachi.

[quote]
If a government can function properly with the help of floor crossing, then be it. But if the government isn't doing anything, even after having all the powers, as we've seen happen with previous governments, then something has to be changed.
[/quote]

So, momentarily assuming FC is morally & legally & religiously [any more ‘ly’?] allowed, Musharraf has got the best of both ends; single man dictatorship with sweeping powers for almost 4 yrs and now all the graduate opportunists & sycophants standing by his side after jumping the floor. So what good this setup has done so far for the common folks? Corruption, crime rate, un- employment, inflation came down even a bit?? Wapda & KESC performance improved? Forget these big issues, did PCB and cricket team do well under the great cricket lover cum part time corp commander Tauqir Zia in the last 3 yrs? This government couldn’t even properly managed an oil spillage in a small quarter off the shores of Karachi despite all the brigadiers, generals & admirals running the show at state owned entities, what to talk about providing a stable & balanced political system and guiding the country towards prosperity & strong leadership.

34

[quote]
And how can you blame Musharraf when people chose these plunderers? You can blame Musharraf if the men that he chose turned out to be robbers
[/quote]

You avoided this question before and I’m putting it here once again. Tell me, you really think Shujaat, Rashid Ahmed, Nawaz Khokar, Akhtar Rehman and others who’re sucking up to Musharraf today are really angels with clean slate?? Does Musharraf know nothing about their repute as being the biggest defaulters & politically corrupted lot?? We all know well how with one stroke of pen, the convicted absconder Ishrat Ibad was baptized off all his past & future sins, flown in from London and installed as Sind governor in return for MQM’s support in government formation. Did Musharraf know nothing about Ibad and his background? And yet he turned to same crooks, thugs & criminals for his own political survival. The accountability bar was engineered & applied in a deliberately selective manner to provide safe heaven for his cabal of goons. Now you tell me how can you blame people for bringing this rotten lot back to parliament?

[quote]
And even if we do assume for a moment that Musharraf chose all these plunderers, what alternates did he have? Where does he get new politicians?
[/quote]

Look, Musharraf jumped in from the skies with a promise of providing a clean political system with “real democracy” as an added bonus to the goofs of Pakistan.
Now in most other countries that’s not what a COAS does for a living. So if he sets on this course knowingly, then either he delivers it or as you said earlier, something’s to be changed, he should pack up and leave cuz he couldn’t deliver on his promise. From what he’s done so far, its clear that he’s more interested in securing his own future and to keep the military establishment out of the bounds of a political check & balance system. If he can twist the rules to keep certain people from getting elected, he sure could have kept rest of these plunderers & thugs away too and let some real fresh faces come to the front.

[quote]
Your critisicm appears to belong to that set of people who criticise just for the heck of it, and then dont give any solutions for the problems
[/quote]

well, military rule isn’t a solution either. Why can’t we give civilian rule some more time for it to mature up. We’ve tried military dictatorship under the garb of basic democracy and mujlis –e shoora with deadly & tragic end results. From what Musharraf has done so far, he’s not offering any solutions either. All this drama of grass root democracy will vanish into thin air as soon as he’s disgraced out of the office or his plane falls off the skies over Bhawalpur, and we’ll be left with even bigger mess to deal with and start from zero again.

[quote]
let me also clarify for one last time: He didn't jump from the skies. He was forced to do what he did. lets be honest here. What would you have done if were the COAS, and the same thing happened to you? i would've done the same as Musharraf did
[/quote]

Gen Karamat was a wise man, despite all the shining medals & swords on his chest, he bowed out gracefully instead of reacting in a knee jerk fashion and getting himself in a mess he knew fully well, he wont be able to come out of clean.

[quote]
Moreover, the way (y)our beloved democracies were robbing the country, we would've defaulted twice by now. Instead of ragging him incessantly, you should be thankful he took over
[/quote]

On one hand you’re cool with corruption, bags of cash changing hands and lotas being rewarded for jumping the floor and on other hand, your accuse them of robbing the country?? Make up your mind.
As for being thankful to Musharraf, we were once in the past thankful to Ayub that he took over, but the political setup of that self-appointed field marshal ultimately led to the break up of country and surrender of 90,000 Pakistanis. As if history wasn’t a lesson for us, we once again danced & jumped up & down and bowed in front of our next savior in line, the Ameer ul Mo’menin who upon completing his tour of duty left behind drugs/kalashankov/jihad culture, the benefits of which we’re still reaping today.

35

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *

You avoided this question before and I’m putting it here once again. Tell me, you really think Shujaat, Rashid Ahmed, Nawaz Khokar, Akhtar Rehman and others who’re sucking up to Musharraf today are really angels with clean slate?? Does Musharraf know nothing about their repute as being the biggest defaulters & politically corrupted lot?? We all know well how with one stroke of pen, the convicted absconder Ishrat Ibad was baptized off all his past & future sins, flown in from London and installed as Sind governor in return for MQM’s support in government formation. Did Musharraf know nothing about Ibad and his background? And yet he turned to same crooks, thugs & criminals for his own political survival. The accountability bar was engineered & applied in a deliberately selective manner to provide safe heaven for his cabal of goons. Now you tell me how can you blame people for bringing this rotten lot back to parliament?
[/QUOTE]

Because it was the people who voted them in. Not Musharraf. I have no love lost for the politicians, anyway. i would rather have no parliament so long as Musharraf is running the country. Scroll back up and read my opinion on the politicians. And even if he had to bend a little to strengthen his hold, SO BE IT. For me ends justify the means. If Mr.Ibad means a stable Sindh, I say why the heck not. You have a better solution to run the country? A stable Sindh means a stable Karachi. Better Law & order equates more business activity. Prove me wrong, has business not picked up again in Karachi? Has Law & order not improved? Sure its not 100% safe, but relatively speaking its a lot better.

What did you expect from him in four years? Completely wipe out the whole political leadership, and bring in new people? That would result in Civil War. Nobody wants an instable Pakistan. And I don’t "blame" the people for bringing these people in. What choices do the people have? You tell me. Who are these young faces that you speak of? Can they make a government of their own?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *
Look, Musharraf jumped in from the skies with a promise of providing a clean political system with “real democracy” as an added bonus to the goofs of Pakistan.
[/QUOTE]

You are guilty of not giving him credit where its due. Didn’t he introduce the Nazim/Naib Nazim system? Isnt he backing the local body system which is real democracy, after all. Didn't he lower the voter age limit so that younger generation could vote in the hopes that maybe “new faces” would come in? Didn’t he increase the number of constituencies? Didn’t he increase the number of women in Parliament? Didn’t he introduce the undergraduate condition for politicians? The system has only started. Give it time to take effect. You can't fry an egg inside its shell. This Local Body system is where the "new faces" will come from. The only other option is to have these new faces "fall from the sky", but then you wouldn't like that, would you?
There's also the National Responsibility Act which will be presented to the parliament soon, which will limit the maximum spending on any project. He's doing everything to clip the wings these looters. If the project exceeds that limit, then it’ll have to be passed through the parliament. I hear no one giving him credit for these steps.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *
Now in most other countries that’s not what a COAS does for a living. So if he sets on this course knowingly, then either he delivers it or as you said earlier, something’s to be changed, he should pack up and leave cuz he couldn’t deliver on his promise. From what he’s done so far, its clear that he’s more interested in securing his own future and to keep the military establishment out of the bounds of a political check & balance system. If he can twist the rules to keep certain people from getting elected, he sure could have kept rest of these plunderers & thugs away too and let some real fresh faces come to the front.
[/QUOTE]

In most other countries, elected governments don’t hijack the Supreme Courts. In most other countries, elected governments don’t settle personal scores with newspapers editors. In most other countries, elected governments don’t freeze the accounts of their people. In most other countries, elected governments don’t siphon off billions of dollars to Switzerland, while the poor perish. In most other countries, elected governments don’t ….you get the point? Did the governments guilty of these acts pack up and leave?

Your claim that he’s only trying to secure his own future is baseless. If he were so intent on securing his own future, then why did he even hold elections? Even if he did, for whatever reason, surely he could’ve kept the MMA out, couldn’t he? In fact he could’ve manipulated the elections to obtain a 2/3rd majority. Smooth sailing for him, secure future, and no LFO headaches to boot. Why would he take this problematic route if he wanted a secure future?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *
well, military rule isn’t a solution either. Why can’t we give civilian rule some more time for it to mature up. We’ve tried military dictatorship under the garb of basic democracy and mujlis –e shoora with deadly & tragic end results. From what Musharraf has done so far, he’s not offering any solutions either. All this drama of grass root democracy will vanish into thin air as soon as he’s disgraced out of the office or his plane falls off the skies over Bhawalpur, and we’ll be left with even bigger mess to deal with and start from zero again.
[/QUOTE]

ahhem. Contradicting yourself? So what you’re saying is that if we had allowed these “looters & plunderers” more time at the helm, they would’ve, for whatever divine reason, stopped all that they were doing? How? The way things were going we would’ve gotten worse, not better. Not in a long, long, long time. And the fact is, all of this criticism is for nothing. You don’t have a vision yourself. You’re just critisicng him for the sake of it. Please provide a better alternate to Musharraf. Do you even have any? Who is going to lead this country? BB? NS? Their henchmen? Who, with US on the prowl for easy pickings?
Why blame Musharraf if your beloved democracy derails the LB system, after his death? Going by this reasoning, he shouldn’t have carried any reforms at all. In fact, going by this reasoning no past government should’ve ever carried any reforms because the later governments would reverse the process. And if some democratic government does reverse his grass root democracy, it’ll only prove the point that the beloved democrats of our country are more aloof to the desires of the people of Pakistan than even the military.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *
Gen Karamat was a wise man, despite all the shining medals & swords on his chest, he bowed out gracefully instead of reacting in a knee jerk fashion and getting himself in a mess he knew fully well, he wont be able to come out of clean.
[/QUOTE]

Then Musharraf must be a brave man for taking up this challenge. And if this is such a difficult job, as you admit yourself, then why criticize him unabatedly? Why not give him the support he needs? After all, this is how it normally works. People carrying out difficult jobs need encouragement and support, not constant backlash.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *
On one hand you’re cool with corruption, bags of cash changing hands and lotas being rewarded for jumping the floor and on other hand, your accuse them of robbing the country?? Make up your mind.
[/QUOTE]

I don’t accuse them. It’s the truth. You think otherwise? They not only robbed us, but they are also guilty of floor crossing. I don’t have a problem with the compromises Musharraf has had to make because having a democratic set up, mock or not, has more benefits than the cost. After all, one of the conditions to get the $3 billion package from America is democracy. Similarly, I do believe that whatever compromises Musharraf did make, and I am sure he had to make a lot of them, the end result has helped Pakistan. Ironically, people called him traitor for siding with America after 9/11. If he had heeded their calls, we would be no where today.You must've criticised him for even that. Didn't you?

36

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *
As for being thankful to Musharraf, we were once in the past thankful to Ayub that he took over, but the political setup of that self-appointed field marshal ultimately led to the break up of country and surrender of 90,000 Pakistanis. As if history wasn’t a lesson for us, we once again danced & jumped up & down and bowed in front of our next savior in line, the Ameer ul Mo’menin who upon completing his tour of duty left behind drugs/kalashankov/jihad culture, the benefits of which we’re still reaping today.
[/QUOTE]

For all we know, Musharraf might just change the fortunes of Pakistani people. I can’t predict the future, just like you, but I do have a good feeling about him, unlike yourself. I base my opinion on the economic revival, you base your opinion on past. Ayub did this, Zia did that. News Flash, Musharraf is neither Ayub, nor Zia. And if those military dictators ended with negative consequences for Pakistan, why don’t you shed some light on the laurels our democratic governments brought for us? At least Ayub, and Zia improved the economy. If your democratic governments were so good, why didn't they fix the problems? isn't it ironic they actually WERE the problem?
And you also contradict yourself by first asking what changes he has brought to the system, and then claiming that whatever he has changed (LB system) will evaporate into thin air, once he’s gone. Why bother arguing at all then, just wait out till he’s gone and then you can argue about the politicians all you want because according to you whatever he does will basically be zeroed out by his successor.

37

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *

So in essence, you’re saying you don’t have any problem with corruption & lota culture as long as it keeps the ball rolling?? That’s exactly what was going on even before Musharraf, why do we need yet another tinpot napolean in shining armor who’d burn up Rs 2billion of our money for a sham referendum and then use the crutches of same plunderers, looters & thugs for his own political career? so where’s the change after almost 4 yrs now??
[/QUOTE]

And look at the end result of "burning up the 2 billion". Musharraf stays on, his team stays on, investor friendly policies continue, Pakistan makes twice as much. Look at the alternate: Musharraf leaves, your democratic governments come in, siphon off the $11 billion. One pulls the others’ legs, and vice versa. Repeat. Pakistan goes nearly bankrupt, and takes the IMF route. The people of Pakistan suffer. Some revel in the glory of this so called democracy, majority is agonized, and marginalized. You being never too happy, start cursing the lotas, plunderers, and looters. We get no where. (I would like to see a reference on 2 billion amount either way)
Sure the promise of democracy sells, I love democracy. Give me the democracy, but look at the ground realities. Who do you think will win the elections if they are held under UN? Don’t you think, with your infinite wisdom, it will be either Nawaz or Benazir? Right now Musharraf can keep them out, but what happens when he’s no more. You can say bye-bye to the economy for one thing.

As for changes:
LB polls, lowering of age limit, increasing the no. of constituencies, increasing the no. of women in Pakistan. National responsibility law. And he’s only starting.

What reforms did the so-called democratic government undertake? Let us have a look at their balance sheet. Musharraf’s fiscal is only starting.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *

Horse trading/floor crossing was one major reason for weak & vulnerable governments of 90s. On one hand you talk about your desire to have a genuine & so called grass root level democracy but in the same breath you don’t have any issue with lotas’ loyalties being bought off with the lures of cash and ministry offers, then again I’d have to ask you the same question: why Musharraf had to jump in from the skies was it for his mock desire of a clean political system or was it due to the fact that this time his own job was on the line when NS fired him?
[/QUOTE]

You say floor crossing was a big issue? Then tell me, my friend, how many governments of the 90’s were sacked because of lotas? And how many were sacked because of their ineptness? Floor crossing was not the problem.
Also, I hear a lot of democratic set ups still practice floor crossing, and use the bate of ministries to lure the politicians. Doesn’t it happen around the globe? You have lobbies in Congress being bought and sold to champion war on one day, and peace on the other. How democratic is that?

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Vonti: *
not quite just that. Read his excerpts again. He also promised to keep those plunderes, looters & thugs of the past away, those who in his own words were given chance twice & they failed. And now you see the same opportunist maliks, chaudrys, khokars, & awans been baptized by our holy Caeser for his not so holy political gimmick, all under the garb of “real democracy” …thanks but no thanks …. this “real democracy” has been pulled on us often by our past tinpot napoleons, one called it basic democracy, the other collected his own shoe shiners under the dome of mujlis –e shoora. And the same shoe shiners & opportunists have now lined up to catch some crumbs from Musharraf’s table. So **where’s the change after almost 4 yrs now??*
[/QUOTE]

Oh yes, I've read his speeches. Have you? Did you see the mention of economic reforms? Did you also care to notice how much of his speeches was devoted economic reforms, and how much to political reforms? Would you say he's completed the economic reforms succesffully? (IMF agrees) Would you agree if I say that Economic reforms formed at least 50% of his agenda? (that is actually a smaller percentage than actual) Would you agree that this means his success rate is better than all of his democratic predecessors combined?

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Vonti: *
And now after about 2 yrs of grass root level democracy, how the situation has improved for the masses?? Has law & order been improved? Has police become more efficient & people friendly? Has KESCE in Karachi really got its acts together? Have road & sewer systems been fixed **anywhere* in Karachi? Can you get your driving license renewed w/o bribing and can you get your utility bill complaints fixed w/o having to run from pillar to post w/ no avail ??? Do people really have access to “their representatives”? you just have to look at their performance in the aftermath of monsoon havoc in Sindh and more so in Karachi.
[/QUOTE]

These are some very basic problems that you mentioned, and they are not because of Musharraf. If there were a democratic set up in the country right now, the situation wouldn’t have been any better. The government is working on police reforms. This colonial police will not change overnight. It’ll be unfair to judge Musharraf based just on this. Lets have the police reforms implemented and then see what happens. Between, what did the governments of BB/NS do to improve any of the above mentioned problems?
And why don’t you look at the Tax reforms, the performance of PTCL, the freedom of news media, etc? Areas where Musharraf has performed better. It was only because of this access to information that the people were better able to see what happened in Karachi. While I haven’t been to Karachi, one of my cousins just did come from there, and he says the roads are in bad shape after the rains. But that’s only natural. Give them time to repair it. If the local body doesn’t, then it’s the responsibility of the people to raise their voices. Musharraf is not going to spoon feed you. He’ll come and visit Karachi, sanction grants (which he did recently), and leave in his Mercedes, while people like you will be left standing on the roadside, pulling their hair out because you see nothing getting repaired, and end up blaming Musharraf. Whose fault is it anyway that these people get elected and then nobody raises a voice when they don’t perform?
As for representatives, I can only speak for myself and my family does have access to the local Nazim. I dont know, neither care much, about others. :)

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *
So, momentarily assuming FC is morally & legally & religiously [any more ‘ly’?] allowed, Musharraf has got the best of both ends; single man dictatorship with sweeping powers for almost 4 yrs and now all the graduate opportunists & sycophants standing by his side after jumping the floor. So what good this setup has done so far for the common folks? Corruption, crime rate, un- employment, inflation came down even a bit?? Wapda & KESC performance improved?
[/QUOTE]

Corruption at the top level has gone down. Look around. Talk to your father. I do. He has to deal with government departments almost daily, and he says its true.
Crime rate is linked with the police reforms. They are in the offing. Lets wait for that. It’s gotten better in any case. Incidents like Quetta were the norm back in NS/BB days, now they are rare. And even for that the government should be held responsible. I am not going to defend them for that.

For the rest, you need to read stuff on your own. There are independent figures available that’ll prove my point. And may I add, these are figures that are a lot better than anything the democratic governments achieved.

38

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Vonti: *
Forget these big issues, did PCB and cricket team do well under the great cricket lover cum part time corp commander Tauqir Zia in the last 3 yrs? This government couldn’t even properly managed an oil spillage in a small quarter off the shores of Karachi despite all the brigadiers, generals & admirals running the show at state owned entities, what to talk about providing a stable & balanced political system and guiding the country towards prosperity & strong leadership.
[/QUOTE]

Tauqir is an ass. I’ve made my opinion about him perfectly clear in other parts of this forum.

You have been conveniently blaming this government for everything, but the million dollar question is, who would've done it better than these people? You make it sound like the Karachi oil spill was the greatest one ever. There have been oil spills of even greater magnitude closer to countries with democratic governments, and better economic health. If democratic governments were so efficient they would’ve minimized the oil spills from those wrecks too. But they didn’t. So your theory of directly linking Musharraf for the incompetence of KSY goes directly out the window. Nevertheless, i do agree the oil spill was not handled properly. But its not Musharraf's fault. you would've seen something very similar to this, if a democratic govt. was in place.

I also question your comment about prosperity and leadership. Maybe you need to check on the rate of increase in poverty level since Musharraf took over. You might also want to have a look at the economic indicators. Pakistan has a better economy today, than in the past 12 years. And that is all because of good leadership. If it had been NS or BB, I can assure you, we would never have such good economic indicators.

The bottom line remains, this government has improved the economy more than any elected government which should help the people of Pakistan in the long term. The political system is still not perfect, but this is the beginning. The government is working on Police, Tax, Wapda, KESC etc. It cannot undo the mistakes of 50 in 4 years. It still needs to do a lot more. Even the most advanced countries have problems of their own. We have some very basic problems. That is why we are a developing country. And we truly are. Talk to people in business. I have. I talked to an exporter of textile, I've talked to Director Finance DSFL, theyu're all praise for musharraf and his government. If i was not a student right now, I know I'd be doing business in Pakistan. And this is not something I would say when NS was in power. In fact i remember talking to my Economics teacher about military taking over from Nawaz months before Musharraf ever did.

Constant bickering won’t get us anywhere. Some people can see the light on the other end, while others keep monkeying up & down in the dark with nothing coming off it.

39

long live General Pervez Musharraf!!!

40

To add to that. Have a look at the profile of Senator Dr. Abdul Hafeez Shaikh
Federal Minister For Privatisation & Investment

This is a killer team Musharraf has assembled. I say if these guys can’t do it for Pakistan, then nobody can. Great to have such qualified professionals at the helm. :k: