Please back off, Benazir!

masadi #200 Where did I get my history? From the man who came up with the land reform program, and who quit in disgust when ZAB refused to let the proposal move forward. Not from pink elephants floating in air, which is where you conjure your theories about the "evil elite".

as for calling me a fool - a man who is incapable of conducting a discussion without adding some insults is hardly in a position to call anyone a fool.

masadi,

.... okhla is not the only one, i too am obsessed with you ........ you are like that scab that just won't go away and the more you scratch it, the uglier it gets ........

...... please get a job and stop bothering us ... maybe, if you are nice to ferozk he can get you a janitorial job at las or aitchison ......

This is from the other article that was taken off the front page so Feroz decided to slip back in and answer my post there accusing me falsely of "putting words in his mouth"
--------- (See, http://chowk.com/interacts/12463

Feroz writes "Read the read article carefully. I had suggested that governments are not created to bring happiness to the people, but to rule over them"

You're a liar anyone can read your article and it clearly says (quote)"The American Declaration of Independence, perhaps the most enlightened of all enlightened political documents, claimed that governments are created to bring happiness to their people and though it may be a laudatory aim.. "(end quote)

I didn't put any words in your mouth you miserable liar, i merely stated what you write above, and how idiotic that reading of the preamble was, it does NOT mean what you are making it say (as my previous post clearly explains) because it means something very different, you have an infantile intellect and then you lie to cover it up when it is exposed...

Check out Okhla's interacts, EVERY SINGLE ONE has my name in it. The sick bas#### is obsessed with me....somebody give him the # of a good shrink, he needs serious help

http://chowk.com/interacts/u/43728

Check out Okhla's interacts, EVERY SINGLE ONE has my name in it. The sick bas#### is obsessed with me....somebody give him the # of a good shrink, he needs serious help

tahmed writes "You mean the same wonderful "socialist" who refused to implement land reforms? "

Where are you getting your "history" from? Kissinger?

The land reforms were implemented and the further reduced ceilings of 1977 and increased taxes on large landowners agriculture income were also made part of the law. This by itself is quite enough considering a country where feudals weild great power. You saw the trend he implemented from 1973 to 1977 and that trend shows successive decision in favor of the people and the small farmer. You don't measure up to his ankle you little fool

Fool me once -------- Shame on you
Fool me twice ------- Shame on me
Fool me thrice ------ We are Pakistanis

These two folks - although they differ in their opinions - are just as much the experts on the topic as anybody else around here, and therefore need to have their cases presented as well.

Astrologers differ on what awaits Gen Musharraf

By Khalid Hasan

WASHINGTON: A British astrologer has predicted that the next two months are the most inauspicious for President General Pervez Musharraf, while an Indian astrologer thinks he may be emerging from his recent troubles.

The British astrologer, an advanced amateur who goes by the name of SH Shah, who predicts, “Considering the overall horoscope of Gen Musharraf, in my view it is highly unlikely that he could hold the power that he has enjoyed for the last eight years for any length of time. There is at least a 70 percent chance that by the end of this year, he will be out of power. In his horoscope there are also indications of his changing residence and perhaps settling abroad.”

According to the London-based astrologer, who spoke to Daily Times on Wednesday, since he does not know Gen Musharraf’s time of birth, he has had to depend on his date of birth. The Pakistani leader was born on 11 August 1943, and is under the influence of Leo, the fifth sign of the zodiac. Not only the Sun but also Jupiter, Pluto and Rahu - the north node of the Moon -were in Leo in his natal horoscope. In the coming months two aspects are very important and both throw a negative light on his destiny. From mid-November to August 2008, the planetary aspects of Gen Musharraf’s stars are not only tense but involve Saturn, which is considered the most malefic planet in astrology. This can be an extremely upsetting and tense period for him and it can create difficult circumstances over which Gen Musharraf will have very little control. These aspects also create a lot of inner and outer conflicts where the Pakistani military leader’s opponents will have an edge on him. These planetary aspects can bring about life changes beyond recognition. On September 29, Mars is moving into the 12th house of Gen Musharraf where it will stay until May 2008. The 12th house is considered the house of confinement and old Arab astrologers used to call it the house of enemies. Mars, which rules the military, is not good news in this house for the Pakistani leader.

However, the Washington-based astrologer, Ronnie Datta, also a serious amateur, believes that the British astrologer sounds too negative, since he ignores the exit of Saturn from Gen Musharraf’s sign Leo and the arrival in his house on September 5 of a confident and pushy collection of the Moon, Jupiter and Pluto. He is of the view that the solar eclipse and new moon on September 11 will “ignite” Uranus and there could even be a bit of hysteria or paranoia floating around.

#196 Masadi: So you agree with HP that you are one of the "Three most informed, enlightened and smart people". um...well..OK.

but then you continue and ruin it all by writing "malign that wonderful man" (ZAB). You mean the same wonderful "socialist" who refused to implement land reforms? or the great educational reformer who sent his own children to the International School in Islamabad?

And then you totally destroy what little hope one has of seeing something enlightening in your post by calling Ferozk and Manto names-that-cannot-be-published!!

HP writes "Three most informed, enlightened and smart people (Asadi, manto, and Ferozk) have chosen to compete in maligning two important politicians of Pakistan"

Appreciate your comments and respect your peace-making efforts but I wouldn't really call anyone (like manto) who threatens his opponents with getting them fired from their job (when he loses an argument) or libel when called a sob "enlightened", neither would I call anyone who tells the US elite that they should imprison Muslims in continent wide prisons a "corridor of security", (Feroz in his article you will recall)as being either smart or enlightened. They know the difficulty any populist leader would have in a setup like Pakistan, they should know that and they also know that the spirit of democracy, the worth of the common man in his or her own eyes in this country, was infused in them thanks to the work of one man, ZAB, they know this and then they pick on a thing here and there to malign that wonderful man. They are both a-holes in my book

In #191 read "Where are you take refuge in the slogans of those that have abandoned all kinds of civil rights (the US elite) and made people, the cheerful robots happy with the abandoned civil rights, I look at the real circumstances on the ground and also note through books of course how Iran and its legitimate governemnt was manipulated by the CIA/Brits on Mossaddeq who are quite similar ideas on resource use in his country."

As

Whereas you take refuge in the slogans of those that have abandoned all kinds of civil rights (the US elite) and made people, the cheerful robots happy with the abandoned civil rights, I look at the real circumstances on the ground and also note (through books of course) how Iran and its legitimate governemnt was manipulated by the CIA/Brits on Mossaddeq using political opponents, something similar occurred in 1977 when they used Bhutto's opponents to bring in the military who both (Mos and Bhutto) had quite similar ideas on resource use in their countries.

Feroz writes "Had Bhutto not refused the mandate of the people of Pakistan, there would have been no riots in the streets and the army would have had no reason, under General Zia-ul-Haq to take over power in a coup d' etat code-named Operation Fairplay on July 5, 1977. "

The accusitions against Bhutto of rigging were never proved, the "riots" you talk about were similar to the riots against Mossaddeq that were arranged by those that wanted to bring the coup to fruit, the losing political parties (don't forget that Bhutto won) played into their hands. The guy was warned by those "higher powers" and when know which one that if he didn't submit he would be made an example of and would lose power. Those "higher powers" work through the Pakistan Army, and they did, rather than your point, the entire history of Pakistan has borne witness to that. Bhutto tackled it, didn't give up his principled stand that was pro-people and was killed in a most barbarous way. What did MAJ do, he NEVER had the mandate of the people, he took the religious exclusion slogan, even though he didn't believe in what he claimed, and then abandoned the vast majority of Muslims in India, ensured that over a million got killed, and the rest were relegated to "suspect minority" existence thanks to a reaction that the MAJ shenanigans produced. That is the difference, one dies for the people and you malign him, the other polishes his ego and sets himself up as king while causing immense suffering that is caused by an "invented" claim which not only did he not believe in, he was supposedly against it in his early career. Who changed and who caused misery, it was MAJ and not Bhutto. Bhutto was the ONLY true leader this nation has seen. You on the other hand are a pathetic fool for using some "mistakes" that he made, mistakes that no one going through the mess thanks to colonization and the MAJ could ever avoid except at his own and at the country's peril. Bhutto's major mistake was that he didn't realize the shenanigans of the colonials and the MAJ fully or he would have tried to work with an amorphous and not a concrete Pakistan construct, he did the best he could and he achieved more than anyone else has in this country. May Allah bless him for his efforts

Re: # 192
masadi , with all your b.s - I believe okhla99?
so, whats the real story?

If you want to know what slander and libel (and that also based on lies) is you should read okhla99's post, that miserable sob has been repeating the same old bs for months now.

Feroz writes "I disagree, with you. There are certain principles that cannot be compromised. There is no reason to limit or even end civil rights even if there an invasion about to happen"

That is where you are being quite ignorant, talking about limiting "civil rights" is a mere claim that people make against those they disagree with. Abandoning civil rights when "an invasion is about to happen" is something very different than abondoning them when the civil society is being used, through their agents by a foreign power in order to subvert a legitimate government. Where are you take refuge in the slogans of those that have abandoned all kinds of civil rights (the US elite) and made people, the cheerful robots happy with the abandoned civil rights, I look at the real circumstances on the ground and also note through books of course how Iran and its legitimate governemnt was manipulated by the CIA/Brits on Mossaddeq who are quite similar ideas on resource use in his country.

Then he writes" agree, with you that Bhutto was the first one to champion socialism in Pakistan and he did appeal to the people. I have nothing against a leader appealing to the people."

That was my main point and since you do not disagree here there is nothing more I need to answer or address (though I will just to take care of your hypocrisy). That is the sum total of what a democratic leader is supposed to be and not only did Bhutto talk that talk he walked that walk moreso than Chavez, the champion of the Left these days. That by itself, fcuk everything else is enough for me to say that he was by far the greatest leader this nation has seen.


Then he writes "Bhutto, was also an evil genius, because his only character flaw, and the biggest, was that he could not hide his meglomania. His popularist policies caused more harm to the nation than they did good and his idea of nationalization ruined the economy of Pakistan"

Those are the claims of his opponents and they are based on character assessment and none of those "opponents" are in a position to pass psychological judgment on his personality. And why should he not have been "arrogant" when defending the rights of the downtrodden whom the other side has always been considering immaterial. He rallied the people, made them realize that they had some worth in a culture that had considered them worthless thanks to colonization and its political economy- was he arrogant with the people or with the powerful is what I am concerned with. That is the only way to govern when you want to alter the social structure, there are no feel-good ways to do that and he tried and any "moral" failure that people brought up to discredit him was in the "mullah" fashion, a distraction. No morality can be higher than giving worth and fulfilling needs of the downtrodden, every immorality falls way short of those that de-moralize through poverty the vast majority of humankind..

By the way nationalization was not bad for Pakistan, just like India and China are finding out today that it was not bad for them, just like the West is finding out today that cloaked nationalization, i.e. government protection and oversight made their industries strong and developed a higher level workforce in the Third World (India and China) that they can now exploit. We have tried the privitization and exploitation experiment and it has done the people no good. You might say that growth was down by the growth of the poor was certainly on the rise even though the coffers of the rich were not being filled to the same extent.

Feroz writes "As to the mandate in East Pakistan, your statement does not make sense...If Bhutto had any inkling of infusing the spirit of democracy in Pakistan, he would have accepted the wishes of the election of 1970 and restored the mandate to the people of East Pakistan.
"

IT makes absolute sense and it is an explanation which your historians of note have overlooked. Bhutto knew the institution that was in control of Pakistan, the rule of the East over the West could not be acceptible to that institution, rather than destroy the entire process forced upon the nation through a non-viable arrangement (of the MAJ), and harm the people, he was not only looking after the national interest but after the mandate of those who had voted for him. Did he not release Mujeeb even though he could have harmed him? Nothin strange that he started out his career under a military ruler either, the fact that he was able to challenge military rule and evoke popular support is what matters. When you have a dominant institutions, you cannot set up an alternative anew and then hope to get somewhere, you have to go through the same structure if you want to amount to anything, the fact that he kept his conscience intact and challenge the entire edifice on which the dictatorship was built, says a lot about his "leadership" as well. Saying that the army was not interested in politics because it was beaten in a battle, is ignorant as well. It is true that the army was weak at the moment but any restructuring had to proceed with extreme caution, and Bhutto was cautious, regarding the Baluchistan issue, I will let him argue with your allegations in his book "If I am assassinated", apparently he claims that the army was operating quite independantly, nevertheless, mistakes do not negate at all what I wrote about what he accomplished in the political mess Pakistan was in, when he appeared on the scene. Bhutto learned in his tenure in the Ayub government that alignment with the US is what was keeping Pakistan down, so he pulled out of SEATO, pulled out of the common wealth and sought alliances with the Thrid World, therefore you point about SEATO and CENTO is moot. Rest will follow later

Masadi you creep !!!! (Utterly & Completely Respected)

So you are still trying to spread your bullshyte notions that have been rejected by the rest of the civilized world!!!!

Will you never learn ???

Don't you remember the hiding you got on faithfreedom.org( at the hands of Ali) ???

Don't you remember the disciplinary meetings in the US University just before they deported you in spite of your pleadings???

Don't you remember your abject surrender and begging/whining tone in which you implored for a second chance to be allowed to stay in the US????

Don't you remember the unceremonious manner in which you were comprehensively rejected and kicked out of the US??

Don't you remember the impish grin on the face of the US immigration (INS) official as you were dragged kicking and screaming to the airplane????

Don't you remember the "evil" students in your Pakistani college who made open mockery of the ideas you tried to teach them???

Don't you remember the management committee meeting which unanimously declared you "unfit" to train young Pakistani students???

Don't you remember how you were thrown out of that college and the security staff alerted to never let you enter again ???

Don't you remember how all your pleadings for "outstanding claims" were met with derisive laughter???

Don't you remember how the Chowk staff has consistently refused to publish your bullshyte articles???

Don't you remember how even lulu.com would not accept your "works" any more???

And now, you are trying to insult Manto et al.

Perhaps now you have reached the nadir of your career.

Continue to rot in hell......