Re: The Official ELECTIONS 2008 Thread
Well Perveen … if you do not mind, let me answer that.
You asked what one like about ‘Q’ more than ‘NS and BB’. Though there are many reasons, let me give you few … each of them is important for me enough that if one was there, still I would have preferred ‘Q’ over ‘NS and BB’. I am taking ‘Q’ as Musharraf regime … OK? 
I am giving four reasons. If you want more reasons, please ask for more
**Reason 1: **
Musharraf regime: Unprecedented Economical growth
NS and BB regime: Bankrupted the economy:
Pakistan** ‘GDP’ and ‘Per capita income’ growth in US dollars during different regimes: Look at Musharraf period that posted highest ever average growth rate and than compare it with ‘NS and BB’ period that posted lowest ever growth rate.**
All percentage increases mentioned are in USA dollars:
Source: State Bank of Pakistan …
http://www.statpak.gov.pk/depts/fbs/statistics/national_accounts/table2.pdf
Ayub (1958-1969): Average increase per year over 8 Years
GDP: 9.4 % per year … … Per capita income: 5.00 % per year
Bhutto (1972-1977): Average increase per year over 5 Years
GDP: 6.7 % per year … … Per capita income: 2.97 % per year
Zia (1077-1988): Average increase per year over 11 Years
GDP: 8.8 % per year … … Per capita income: 5.77 % per year
**BB and NS (1988-1999): Average increase per year over 11 Years **
GDP: 4.1 % per year … … Per capita income: 1.55 % per year
Musharraf (1999-2007): Average increase per year over 8 Years
GDP: 11.3 % per year … … Per capita income: 8.89 % per year
Reason 2:
Extremely low corruption compare to ‘BB and NS’:
Source I am using ‘Transparency International’ … their own site:
www.transparency.org.pk
Go to their box 8th from the bottom on above site:
Box title: National corruption perception survey 2002 (Page 40)
You can read all of them but page 40 gives the comparison:
Since corrupt journalists tried to misguide innocent illiterate Pakistanis twisting the corruption perception report of 2006, Transparency got embarrassed and had to come up with clarification press release. If you want to, you can read that too (In same box).
Press release Clarification of NCPS 2006 (22 September 2006)
(NCPS = National corruption perception Survey)
**Question: ****Which government was/is most corrupt? **
Results: This is the answer what Transparency Internaltion got:
48.7 percent said that BeNazir period was most corrupt.
43.03 percent said that Nawaz period was most corrupt.
3.17 percent said that Musharraf period is most corrupt.
2.17 percent said that Ayub period was most corrupt.
1.53 percent said that Zia period was most corrupt.
1.4 percent said that Z. Bhutto period was most corrupt.
Just look at figures of BeNazir and Nawaz … than compare that with Musharraf and you will notice that it is difference of sky with earth. You can see that compare to BB and NS, present regime is negligible corrupt. Transparency International survey found that 91.73 percent believe that periods of ‘NS and BB’ was most corrupt period Pakistan has ever seen. Whereas even though Musharraf rule is current and many supporters of ‘NS and BB’ plus ‘so-called Jihadis’ wants Musharraf government to be shown as bad and corrupt, still only 3.17 percent though that Musharraf government is corrupt.
Reason 3:
No embarrassing corruption stories in world media like NS and BB stories (I am just including one as sample):
I am using British Newspapers. One should remember that British Newspapers do not accuse anyone of corruption until they have enough proof for that, as that could lead them to defamation sue cases … where defamed people can get huge compensation. It should be noted that NS and BB, none sued the papers.
For anyone want to find out personally if what quoted is wrong, for them, British Newspapers archive can be found from main British libraries. One is in front of Colindale tube station London NW9.
Nawaz Shareef: Read Karnamay of NS:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/analysis/story/0,259435,00.html
BeNazir Bhutto: Read Karnamay of BB:
http://www.mqm.com/bb-booty-times-1998-04-12.htm
Reason 4:
**No embarrassment, that other countries (like USA) discuss corruption of Pakistan head of state in their Senate and promulgate laws to save their banks from looted money of them crooks: **
Like Zardari, BB and Nusrat Bhutto case discussed in American Senate (I am using American Senate own site):
http://www.senate.gov/~gov_affairs/110999_report.htm
Read second (out of four cases discussed): Zardari case is somewhere in the middle of the report.