Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
Which party and which leader? please specify as I have no particular party ... as yet :)
Saleem, you are trying to reason with a known fascist. To him any non-punjabi belongs to MQM. He is part of the establishment which has been feeling pressure over the last couple of years. They can't accept the fact they are hated all over pakistan.
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
.
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
I hate saying it but I hope to God ISI rigs the election in favor of PPP, otherwise it will be end of Pakistan as we know it. All you democracy chanters don't understand the situation on the ground.
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
Saleem, you are trying to reason with a known fascist. To him any non-punjabi belongs to MQM. He is part of the establishment which has been feeling pressure over the last couple of years. They can't accept the fact they are hated all over pakistan.
Well brother ... what I wrote is logical conclusion of something undetermined ... that is ... who could be responsible of 12th May masacre .... and certainly one have to go for thsoe who benefited from it and that is Atizaz, his client Iftikhar, and his party PPP ... and that is what I wrote ... and I beleive that knowing the truth could hurt some people ... so its ok :)
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
I hate saying it but I hope to God ISI rigs the election in favor of PPP, otherwise it will be end of Pakistan as we know it. All you democracy chanters don't understand the situation on the ground.
I don't know why some folks love to predict demise of Pak.
PPP halla gullah was big, but they won't be allowed to repeat that same thing again.
Remember Lier-Lawyers-their-pants-on-fire's first halla gulla after CJ suspension? They got wrong idea and guess what, Once the CJ was sent packing, they couldn't repeat their anarachy.
The same thing is true for PPP or ML or anyone else. Next time around anarchists will face the full force of the state.
Thus the bottom line is this. Elections should be fair (as much as possible) and then whoever wins should form the government.
And for crying out loud, these politikos should concentrate on nation building for a change. No more leg pulling crab mentality please.
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
That's a nice idea, but reality is different. Sindhis right now are seething in anger at punjabis.
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
KK bro! Yes there is no denying that Sindhis are in mourning right now.
Some PPP supporters went so far to rough up PPP leaders from out of Sindh. However these are emotional times, and no one should suggest rigging elections just to placate Sindhis. That means Sindhis want injustice! And that is not true if you know Sindhis from up close.
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
hmmm ... well, you are challenging me but how can I prove to someone something who would not accept anything however true and logical?
Anyhow, let me try :)
First of all, Supreme Court did not cleared Iftikhar but what they did was that they stopped the investigation by Supreme Judicial Council on reference against Iftikhar and let him get away with all accusation what was there in the reference.
Now let see what happened:
Suppose I went to a jewlery shop where I saw that shop keeper is holding a policeman and accusing that he stole diamond ring from shop and have it in his pocket. Shop called the police. Now Police wants to search him for the ring. I saw that the accused policeman do not want to give serach and is making all sort of excuses. Then I saw that another man whom police as well as accused policeman knew entered the shop.
This new arrived man started advocating for the accused policeman and made the police agree that they do not do search but let the accused policeman leave the shop. It seems that Police was eager to oblige accused policeman in getting away without search and thus let the accused policeman go without search and declared that shop keeper was holding the accused policeman wrongly.
Shop keeper kept saying that ring is in the pocket of accused policeman and thus police should search him for that stolen Diamond ring. Shopkeeper also started saying that police did not do the job properly by letting the accused policman go and that they should have done the search. Anyhow, since police let the man go, shopkeeper had no choice and he accepted the loss of Diamond ring.
Now you tell me that if the accused policeman is thief or not?
Maybe you would say that he is not thief and that there is no proof that he stole the ring as police let him go. But for me, he is thief.
From what I saw, I believe that if accused policeman was not thief than he would have let the search done but since he was thief, he kept making excuses and in the end got away with Diamond ring because other police (who were also corrupt) helped him get away with the crime. For me, his excuses from getting searched and in the end leaving the shop without search even though he was accused of stealing is ample proof that he stole the ring.
Further, I believe that all those police that were called to search were corrupt as if they were not, they would not have let the accused policeman leave without search. To me, the person that advocated for the accused policeman against his search is also corrupt.
To me, disgraced ex-CJ case is similar to above case ... where ... government is shop keeper. Accused policeman is Iftikhar. Police that let accused policeman leave the shop without search (without going through investigation) are Supreme court judges who let Iftikhar get away without investigation. And the man that entered the shop and started advocating for accused policeman to police so that they can let him go is Atitaz.
To me, all that helped Iftikhar get away without investigation on reference charges are corrupt as are those in above story. To me, if Iftikhar was innocent of accusations than he would have helped in investigation as it was in his interest (in story, if accused policeman did not stole the ring, he would have let the serach happen, rather would have asked for search himself).
I think that what happened in ex-CJ case ... the way Iftikhar was avoiding investigation, the way supreme court judges helped him avoid investigation and the way Atitaz argued so that investigation is not done, is ample proof that Iftikhar and all invovled in getting him away from investigation are corrupt.
I would agree with you, but there is nothing in this case to agree with. And I have given you all kinds of evidence to support the Anti Mush arguments, and you dont agree to anything, but here we go again, let me try anyways:)
I answered this whole thing in depth in a few weeks ago... I dont know if you read it or not...
To summarize..
Article 200 something that Mush used to call out the CJ, doesnt apply to the CJ...
If it doesnt apply to the CJ, then its up to the SC to define how the law should be applied. That is the role of the SC.
The supreme court decides that in this case the SJC does not have the authority to try the CJ. This pronouncement is in accordance withe the constitution, as again, its the job of the SC to define how the law is applied.
The SJC was comprised of people with a clear and obvious Bias towards the CJ, including the like of the chamch Dogar, who is now the false CJ.
Since there is no Constitutional precedent here, (since most CJ's when told to step down, did so without question), the Supreme Court decided, which is its right, that it had the authority to try the CJ.
The Supreme Court found the Govt accusation unsubstantiated and through the case out... So the CJ was exonerated.. If you think the SC was biased, then thats something you have to prove.
The problem here is that there is an obvious problem within the system.. Aitazaz Ehsan rightfully exposed the loop hole in the system...
Mush should go back and through parliament, close this loop hole and retry the CJ... But instead, he took the illegal action of calling emergency, which he had no authority to call anyways, because he wasnt and still isnt the President...
The Supreme Court was right to throw out the case.. The govt had ridiculous accusations that didnt deserve a listining... They accused the CJ of driving mercedez cars, and promoting his son? Everyone in Mushies govt is guilty of that crime...
What the Supreme Court did was completely within its mandate... People who disagree are only those who dont repect the Constitution or democcratic institutions.
The only crime of the CJ was challeneging the writ of a dictator, bringing corrupt indviduals to task, and imposing some degree of accountability to the system..
If thats a crime then I hope everyone in Pakistan commits it.
The whole case against the CJ, is a clear example of Mush govt Hypocracy and double standard.. If people like Benazir Bhutto can be given a clean sheet and cleared of all coruption charges, why is the CJ being accused?
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
Which party and which leader? please specify as I have no particular party ... as yet :) .... and yea ... I did not gave BB any name other than ... 'Goddess' for some and 'mega corupt leader' to me.
As for Kali Mai ... I did not call that to BB ... but I called PPP supporters who behaved the way they did after BB death .... as they were supporters of Kali Mai (not supporter of BB) ... and that is why I wrote ... 'a group of PPP supporters that can best be called .... followers of Kali Mai' ... but as you know ... it is not a group of PPP supporters that support BB but all PPP supporters support BB ... So, please take words used according to what they are used for:)
The way you are defending 'certain' ethnic fascist parties, its quite clear who you support. Also, when you come out here believing a party like PML[Q] will overwhelming win the elections, its obvious you dont want to be taken seriously despite the 50,000 paras you type. So what is the word for the chief of MQM, since you called BB a kalli mai (though she was quite gori)...
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
Which party and which leader? please specify as I have no particular party ... as yet :) .... and yea ... I did not gave BB any name other than ... 'Goddess' for some and 'mega corupt leader' to me.
As for Kali Mai ... I did not call that to BB ... but I called PPP supporters who behaved the way they did after BB death .... as they were supporters of Kali Mai (not supporter of BB) ... and that is why I wrote ... 'a group of PPP supporters that can best be called .... followers of Kali Mai' ... but as you know ... it is not a group of PPP supporters that support BB but all PPP supporters support BB ... So, please take words used according to what they are used for:)
Well, the way PPP supporters were chanting anti-Pakistani naaray at BB's funeral, one wonders what their ultimate goal is?
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
So you are prediciting a Rawanda like genocide here! Well done! You are no less than Kekshan in ethnic bias.
Yes there can be a fight between ethnic groups here but at the end of the day they will realize that no group can throw out the other groups and every one has to live here - as they realized in Lebanon after 17 years of civil war.
I HATE to see any kind of ethnic fighting or infighting. In my view ethnicity is something played on by politicians when the actual struggle is one of class more than anything else. There is no need or call for ethnic based infighting.
BUT as you ask.
Thats my fear. Look at the anger in the country right now. The lack of democracy and opression is leading to a civil war. If the elections are rigged their will be a civil war. Everything is hanging on a string. And yes like you asked, Karachi will be the main target and will suffer the most. It has the biggest mixing pot of ethnicities. The Sindhis already were targetting non-Sindhis travelling in the Sindh country side after Dec. 28th. In places like Punjab or NWFP the effects would be minimal. While you see some ethnic tension in Lahore\Pindi between Punjabis and the minority groups, the tension is really quite minimal and I can't imagine ever seeing anyone kill over it, nor do I ever recall any instance of ethnic violence in these areas.
Let all hope for the best. I think we are all on the same page in hoping things stabilize and the federation stays strong.
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
Oh good. From saying election 'will be rigged’, now people are saying 'if the elections are rigged’. 
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
I HATE to see any kind of ethnic fighting or infighting. In my view ethnicity is something played on by politicians when the actual struggle is one of class more than anything else. There is no need or call for ethnic based infighting. BUT as you ask. Thats my fear. Look at the anger in the country right now. The lack of democracy and opression is leading to a civil war. If the elections are rigged their will be a civil war. Everything is hanging on a string. And yes like you asked, Karachi will be the main target and will suffer the most. It has the biggest mixing pot of ethnicities. The Sindhis already were targetting non-Sindhis travelling in the Sindh country side after Dec. 28th. In places like Punjab or NWFP the effects would be minimal. While you see some ethnic tension in Lahore\Pindi between Punjabis and the minority groups, the tension is really quite minimal and I can't imagine ever seeing anyone kill over it, nor do I ever recall any instance of ethnic violence in these areas.
Let all hope for the best. I think we are all on the same page in hoping things stabilize and the federation stays strong.
What minorities in Punjab? They are hardly any.
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
What minorities in Punjab? They are hardly any.
LOL have you ever been to Punjab with all your irrational hatred. Typical MQM attitude. There are literally millions of Pashtuns living in Lahore and Rawalpindi. I would venture to say there is also a sizable minority of the urdu speaking in Lahore and Multan. Even if you look at the Punjabi political elite people like Sheikh Rashid or Nawaz Sharif, they are originally Kashmiri. Unlike certain other ethnocentric groups, Punjabis have an open heart and minorities have done very well in Punjab.
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
At this point I would say there are definite signs Mushy and co. plan to rig elections
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
^ rig it in such a way that no one gets a clear majority, a hung parliament that wont be able to do anything to oust him
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
I would agree with you, but there is nothing in this case to agree with. And I have given you all kinds of evidence to support the Anti Mush arguments, and you dont agree to anything, but here we go again, let me try anyways:) I answered this whole thing in depth in a few weeks ago... I dont know if you read it or not... To summarize..
Article 200 something that Mush used to call out the CJ, doesnt apply to the CJ...
If it doesnt apply to the CJ, then its up to the SC to define how the law should be applied. That is the role of the SC.
The supreme court decides that in this case the SJC does not have the authority to try the CJ. This pronouncement is in accordance withe the constitution, as again, its the job of the SC to define how the law is applied.
I think you mean article 209. Well, you are wrong to say that reference against CJ cannot be sent using article 209. That is different matter that corrupt judges of SC showed that they do not know (or want to accept) English or words of laws ... and the reason is obvious, that is ... they are corrupts ... and that is the reason I consider them as corrupt as Iftikhar.
If you do not believe me, read the article 209. According to article 209, reference can be sent against any judge (including CJ)
As for composition of SJC ... what corrupt SC judges argued twisting clear wordings ... wordings what even A level student could understand is the reference to supreme court judges ... and these corrupt judges assumed that what applies to Supreme court judges in SJC is different than what applies to CJ ... but they are absolutely wrong ... because CJ in part of SJC ... not just as CJ but as Supreme court judge.
Read the article and you will understand.
Example: Pakistan Cricket team ... Captain of the team is part of team in same way as other players and what applies to other players apply to captain too.
For instance ... if particular Articlae in cricket law says that ...
'If there is investigation against a player ... Captian and two most senior players in team would investigate. ... but if players in investigating team is to get investigated than next senior player would take his place'.
Now from above Article it does not mean that if Captain is to get investigated than there is no provision who would replace him ... or that this investigating team could not investigate Captain.
Because ... when Article says that ... If player in investigation team to get investigated than next senior player would take his place ... than in Player 'Captain' is also included. And thus if Captain is to get investigated ... still investigating team would be complete without Captain ... and 3 most senior players would make the investigating team (excluding Captain).
These idiot corrupt Supeme Court judges interpreted that since Captian is to get investigated ... there is no provision who should replece him or that investigating team cannot be made without Captain ... ignoring the fact that Captain is there as Captian ... because he is player first ... and thus his position as player is actual ... being Captain is secondary.
Same way .. CJ is actually first a 'Supreme Court Judge' and being CJ is secondary. Whatever is applied to SC judges applies to CJ too and that is why in Article 209... CJ is not mentioned because when SC judge is mentioned, CJ automatically get included.
But than ... this is how corrupts work the way SC judges did. ... Twist or ignore the fact and do wrongs.
In above post (example of suspected policeman)... I could have written that ... police did not searched accused policeman saying that they could not search policeman as they can only search civilian accused ... Though since accused policeman is also civilian, they needed to search accused policeman too not as policeman but civilian.
[quote]
That is again stupid reason to stop SJC do the investigation ... because if there was any reservation against particular judge than that judge could be replaced ... no need to stop investigation. (Even though that is also undesirable as there are 5 judges in SJC ... and decision of majority is accepted. Plus, Dogar was SC judge and was equal with as much respect as Iftikhar in all respect and his decision was as valid for all reasons).
[quote]
5. Since there is no Constitutional precedent here, (since most CJ's when told to step down, did so without question), the Supreme Court decided, which is its right, that it had the authority to try the CJ.
[/quote]
No, SC judges had no right to change the meaning of what is written in constitution and what it meant ... and then declare that there is no constitutional precedent so they go against the constitution. Judges are not law making authority, they are authority to interpret laws ... but that also according to accepted English language the law is enacted and way people use language, not according to their own developed language twist so that they can twist the laws for their own corruption.
[quote]
6. The Supreme Court found the Govt accusation unsubstantiated and through the case out... So the CJ was exonerated.. If you think the SC was biased, then thats something you have to prove.
[/quote]
Again wrong. Supreme Court did not found accusation unsubstantiated and how they can when they did not even seen a single evidence regarding accusation or asked to get it provided ... neither they exonerated CJ but stopped the investigation ... and thus left the accusation unanswered.
[quote]
The problem here is that there is an obvious problem within the system.. Aitazaz Ehsan rightfully exposed the loop hole in the system...
Mush should go back and through parliament, close this loop hole and retry the CJ... But instead, he took the illegal action of calling emergency, which he had no authority to call anyways, because he wasnt and still isnt the President...
[/quote]
Again wrong. There is no loop hole. Only hole was in the head of Atitaz and those judges. Law is clear but they twisted, intentionally misinterpreted the laws ridiculously, and lied.
[quote]
The Supreme Court was right to throw out the case.. The govt had ridiculous accusations that didnt deserve a listining... They accused the CJ of driving mercedez cars, and promoting his son? Everyone in Mushies govt is guilty of that crime...
[/quote]
Again wrong. SC had no right to interfere with SJC what they did and thus they deserved what Musharraf did to them, that is kicked them out of office.
Government accusations were all valid (if you want to, I can post the whole reference .... its on net).
If CJ was driving Mercedes (that is only one point in reference out of many) still the thing to see is that if he was entitled to it or not and if he was than its ok, and if he was not than that was corruption and he should have been asked to answer that.
SC has no right to say that 'A looted the country but since many looted the country than A should not be prosecuted ... and that A looting the country was right ... so we would not punish A'.
[quote]
What the Supreme Court did was completely within its mandate... People who disagree are only those who dont repect the Constitution or democcratic institutions.
[/quote]
You are wrong that SC did within its mandate ... as SC mandate is to see all cases in front of them according to law of the country that they do not make but follow. They cannot decide what is right or wrong but have to follow the laws. Those who disagree with SC judges when they openly abused the constitution are absolutely right. These judges were corrupt and they deserved the kick what they got in the end ... As saying goes ... Allah kee lathie may dair hay andher nahie hay ... and that is what happened, these people should have got kicked long time ago ... but got kicked on 3rd Nov.
It is way of Allah that Allah uses Humans in this world to punish other humans who over step and here Allah used Musharraf to kick them corrupts in SC.
[quote]
The only crime of the CJ was challeneging the writ of a dictator, bringing corrupt indviduals to task, and imposing some degree of accountability to the system..
If thats a crime then I hope everyone in Pakistan commits it.
The whole case against the CJ, is a clear example of Mush govt Hypocracy and double standard.. If people like Benazir Bhutto can be given a clean sheet and cleared of all coruption charges, why is the CJ being accused?
[/quote]
Again that is wrong understanding of fact. I am not saying that there is no corruption in Pakistan or that people do not get away with corruption in Pakistan or that Musharraf is Angel or his administration was Angel ... But than crime of Iftikhar was not what you mentioned, it was worse. Ifitkhar problem was interfering with the running of the state, state security, poking his nose everywhere unnecessarily and also at the same time doing all sorts of corruption, nepotism and misconduct while in office. In the end he was antagonizing many who were doing their duty ... but it was not his antagonizing others that brought him down but cause of his disgrace is his own doings ... I personally believed that none of past CJs were as corrupt, as pigheaded, as involved in nepotism and had as bad manners as Iftikhar had.
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
saleem plz post on the baghwandas thread, and try to keep it short
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
Article 209 says that the CJ is part of the SJC... If the CJ is the one on trial, then there is no one to sit on the bench of the SJC...
The person who should be CJ, isnt there, so they choose someone with a bias towards the cj... The CJ has the right to demand a non biased SJC... The SC determined that this case could not be tried by a SJC that is stacked unfairly against the CJ. Who are we to disagree with them? If Mush has a problem, then go back and refight the case.
The SUPREME COURT, has the constitutional right, as it is its resposnsibility to decide how Article 209 should be applied. Under the circumastnaces, the SC decided it had the authority to try the CJ because the SJC cant be headed by the CJ or the person tht should take his place... The SJC would not be valid as they would not provide a fair case against the CJ.
If Mush doesnt like it, then bring another case against the CJ.
If Mush or you think this is corruption, then they should go back and take constitutional measures to make sure this loop hole is covered... But Mush doesnt know anything about democracy or how it functions so he is incapable of doing such.
The SC found the CJ innocent... Thats all that counts.. If Mush doesnt like it, go to the Parliament, and amend the contitution to cover this legal loop hole.
The supreme court followed the law and their verdict was given after the tried the CJ. Unlike Mush, the Supreme Court only interprets the Law, which is its mandate.. Mush is the one who abuses it... The Supreme Court of any country has the responsibilty of interpreting laws, it not up to the executive.. Executive only makes the laws. Its the SC that determines it application.
You have yet to present exactly what the CJ was guilty of by the way... Specifics please...
If CJ Iftikar is guilty of interferance, then everyone else is guilty of the same thing... I think Pakistan needs some sort of accountability.. Lack of accountability is something that is prevelent in Pak... It leads to crisis, acccidents, deaths.. If Mush isnt going to do it, thank god the CJ is.
Besides, how ridiculous is it that a man who claims to be both president and COAS, can accuse the CJ, the head of a legitimate democratic institution, of interfering in things that arrent within his mandate! Come on!
As for Judicial corruption, the CJ and other justices have proved the contrary, while the Mush govt have been shown to increasingly corrupt... So why should we buy the whole corruption charge?
This was clearly a move to establish the writ of the state on Supreme Court... The CJ stood up to the corrupt, demanded accountabilty, thats all..
This is clearly an attack by the feudal/militsry establishment to perpetuate its control and not allow for demoratic institutions to challenge the anti Pakistan establishment.
This obviously reflectes problems within the judical system of Pak... Its should be fixed, but only through contitutional means... There is somehting that has to be done, a mechanism in place for such situations. But that would requre amending the Constitution through the Parliament.. Mush, not representing democratic institutions, with his rubber stamp Prliament fell into his own trap... If this Mush mangled Constitution can serve the intrests of a dictator, then it can also be interpreted to serve the intrests of democracy by not allowing the CJ to be resigned for trivial reasons. Mush fell into a constitutional trap...
If you think the CJ got away with MURDER, then so be it... So has Musharaf and everyone else in his Govt. But for some reason, you hold the CJ up to some higher standard then everyone else...
If CJ can be tried for trivial BS, then so should all others be held accountable, or no one at all.
Re: Viewpoints from Sindh
PaKpatriot1: Brother, I read what you wrote ... but only thing I made from your post is that:
You have not read Article 209 ... or if read, you did not tried to understand it. If you would have read and understood it, you would have realised that SC judges were either incompetent and ignorant of English and wording of constitution (article 209) .... or were corrupt and thus intentionally did not understood what article 209 says.
You have not read the reference agaisnt Iftikhar ... as if you had, you would not have considered Iftikhar an honest person ... because most mentioned in the reference is so obvious (still high level of corruption, nepotism, misuse of office, misconduct and misbehaviour case) that government could not have sent reference without them to be true because it was simple for any judge to investigate and find them to be true or lies.
You have nothing to say other than that .. If A dance naked than B should be allowed to dance naked too ... in other words ... If many are doing corruption, nepotism, misuse of power, misbehaviour and guilty of misconduct than Iftikhar should not be told not to do that.
From your post it also seems that you are under illusion that SC found Iftikhar not guilt ... as they did not ... but they only stopped investigation by SJC against Iftikhar ... that means they did not found 'Iftikhar not guilty of the allegations in reference' but they stopped reference getting investigated.
Since you have nothing to say ... instead of talking about reference and what Iftikhar did and ... why you support a person as CJ who could be guilty of nepotism, corruption, misuse of post, misconduct and misbehaviour? ... and that why such corrupt person should be left as CJ? ... and that what right SC have to stop SJC when SJC is suppose to be above judges? ... through out your post the escape route you took is that to just keep jumping on Musharraf and what he can do and what he cannot ...
But the worse is that ... You could not see the difference between the post of Chief Justice and other posts in the country.
Anyhow ... I do not think that it matters. You stay happy :) ... In the end Iftikhar got a good kick and I dont care where he has ended ... he is no more an entity worthy of caring and talking about anyhow. :)
Actually, I beleive that after years when there would be no Musharraf and people would look at things objectively ... Iftikhar is going to be remembered as disgraced person ... because all allegations against him is now published and thus would be on record and would stand against him as he did not faced them but did all to avoid them ... and Atizaz would also going to be remembered as person who supproted Iftikhar and his corruption ... and all disgraced sacked judges would stay on record that they did not let SJC function just to save their corrupt boss Iftikhar.