In The Line of Fire: Book Tour Details

Posted on September 21, 2006
Filed Under >Adil Najam, Books, People, Politics, TV, Movies & Theatre
Total Views: 35387


Adil Najam

Just got hold of a list of major media appearances that Gen. Pervez Musharraf will be making as part of his book tour to promote In The Line of Fire: A Memoir. The book is publsihed by Simon and Schuster which will be handing much of the book tour, although it is clear that he will be asked about and will speak about much more than just the book.

(BTW, there is also a White House meeting with President Bush on Friday; so Gen. Musharraf will remain busy).

ATP had alreday written about the general’s appearance on Jon Stewart’s The Daily Show, and we have a ccurrently ongoing ATP Poll on Grading Gen. Musharraf’s Performance in office. I am sure there will be other appearances too, but here is a list of the key ones.

Sept. 24: 60 Minutes
Sept. 25: NBC’s Today Show
Sept. 26: The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Sept. 27: NPR’s Morning Edition
Oct. 1: NBC’s Meet The Press

Although there are always surprises, those familiar with the US media landscape would agree that one could express the toughest questions on Meet The Press with Tim Russert and The Dialy Show with Jon Stewart. The Today Show and Morning Edition appearances are more likely to focus on the ‘softer’ and more personal questions. 60 Minutes can go eitehr way, depending on who is interviewing him, but is likely to be a mix of personal and political issues.

Also heard on the internet that the ghost writer for the book is Humayun Gauhar. I am not at all sure if this is true or not. If this is, in fact, true that would be something. Humayun Gauhar is another ‘PR maven’, and son of Ayub Khan’s media guru, Altaf Gauhar. Reportedly, Ayub Khan’s biography, Friends, Not Masters, was ghost-written by Altaf Gauhar.

If true, the coincidence and the connection would be just a little too perfect. Which is why I remain skeptical about the authenticity of this rumor. Readers, does anyone have a sense if this is true or not?

ADDITION (23 September, 2006)

Video clips (in three parts) of Bush-Musharraf press conference at the White House on Sept. 22:

125 Comments on “In The Line of Fire: Book Tour Details”

  1. Adnan Ahmad says:
    September 21st, 2006 4:30 pm

    I am just dumbfounded at his statements made to 60 minutes, recorded today. Pakistan may have found its biggest showman to date.

  2. falcon says:
    September 21st, 2006 4:51 pm

    The fact that Mush mentions Armitage’s threat is interesting. Armitage is currently in trouble in the Valerie Plame case. He is close to Colin Powell who is seen as being against the Neocons. Recently Armitage also wrote an article supporting Pakistan and Musharraf (“Keep Pakistan on Our Side”). In today’s American political scene, threatening Pakistan has to be a virtue. By helping out Armitage, could Musharraf be helping strengthen the supporters of more reasonable American foreign policy?

    (by the way, the text box for entering comments on this site is absoloutly terrible and near impossible to use…typing in it, whle text is updated below is like trying to think deep thoughts with a bunch of babies crying)

  3. September 21st, 2006 4:56 pm

    Aside for Falcon. Can you plesae send us a comment seperately on why and how the text box does not work for you. Is the font too large? Or is the preview below a distraction? Or something else? Also, which browser you use? That will help us fix the problem.

  4. Adnan Ahmad says:
    September 21st, 2006 5:02 pm

    Falcon, It is truly an educated guess from you. In my opinion, it could be any number of things, including what you mentioned and, going down as much as getting the right pitch for sunday primetime for 60 minutes.

  5. September 21st, 2006 6:00 pm

    For the first time in a while I am actually getting interested in his interviews. What was said in the 60 minutes interview is striking. I think with the Iran issue continuing to boil, there is much happening in that region that is yet to be disclosed to public. How Iran finds the strength to stand up to the US in this particular way, inspite of all that they have seen happen in Afghanistan and Iraq, is quite surprising (unless they are simply foolish to recognize the threat).

  6. PatExpat says:
    September 21st, 2006 6:36 pm

    Adnan, this a first of series of dumbfounding statements you will here during his book tour.

    All is not well in North Waziristan and Talibans are making a resurgence in Afghanistan despite average of 50 “suspected” militants being killed in skirmishes daily. Hope nothing significant happens as long as he is in US.

    With Hudood Ordinance, Baluchistan, Waziristan, Abdul Qadeer Khan; Musharraf has a lot on his plate. He will need to make a lot of wild statements to hold his own during all these shows.

    This is going to be one wild ride.

  7. Daktar says:
    September 21st, 2006 6:39 pm

    I am really intrigued by this thing about Humayun Gohar being the ghost rider. I agree with you that it is probably too cute to be true. Someone would have figured out the irony of this since his father had ghost written for Ayub Khan.

  8. nuzhat aziz says:
    September 21st, 2006 7:01 pm

    He is indeed a brave man to go up against Jon Stewart. I can not wait.
    P.S. Can someone please tell Kasuri to tone down his swagger a little.

  9. Samdani says:
    September 21st, 2006 9:39 pm

    This interview is indeed dynamite. Whatever else happens, the book will sell; I just ordered by copy. Its all over the news now. According to the UK newspaper, Times:

    “the President of Pakistan, claimed last night that the Bush Administration threatened to bomb his country “into the Stone Ageâ€

  10. falcon says:
    September 21st, 2006 11:18 pm

    [quote comment="3033"]All is not well in North Waziristan and Talibans are making a resurgence in Afghanistan despite average of 50 “suspected” militants being killed in skirmishes daily. Hope nothing significant happens as long as he is in US.[/quote]
    A columnist recently suggested that this is actually a positive move. Pakistan will now attempt to solve the trouble in tribal lands the way it has been done for centuries, with negotiations, bribes–sticks as well as carrots. An improvement over the American tactic of “bomb’em to hell.”

    With Hudood Ordinance, Baluchistan, Waziristan, Abdul Qadeer Khan; Musharraf has a lot on his plate. He will need to make a lot of wild statements to hold his own during all these shows.[/quote]
    Regarding Hudood Oridnance and women’s rights, now that the government is starting to back away from their initiatives, I think some civil groups are realizing that they need to start work at the grass-roots level. In my book, putting in the hard work of convincing the population is always better than imposing a solution, even if that means that a few more years of hardship.

  11. falcon says:
    September 21st, 2006 11:21 pm

    [quote comment="3020"]Falcon, It is truly an educated guess from you. In my opinion, it could be any number of things, including what you mentioned and, going down as much as getting the right pitch for sunday primetime for 60 minutes.[/quote]
    I’m certainly not one to advance conspiracy theories. If someone in Pakistan actually did think it through this far, frankly, I’ll be impressed with their understanding of American culture/media.

  12. September 22nd, 2006 1:43 am

    Seems that Mush’s response is the reaction of what bush had said earlier that is he wouldn’t hesitate some military action in Pakistan to hunt Bin Laden.A tussel b/w Mush and Bush?

  13. Altamash Mir says:
    September 22nd, 2006 1:58 am

    President Musharraf certainly has a lot on his plate…but after seeing him at the UN press conference, I can say that he can handle himself.

    To watch his UN press conference:
    real player:

    UN Page:

  14. PatExpat says:
    September 22nd, 2006 3:26 am

    How can Musharraf allow himself to be grilled by foreign journalists and media and not allow similar freedoms to local countrymen.

    Today in Dawn,

    [quote post="319"] this was the fifth case of disappearance of journalists in Sindh over the past six months, while four journalists were killed and an equal number of mediamen were victimised by being implicated in concocted cases as punishment for covering events and exposing the high-handedness of the state machinery.

    Mehardeen Marri of Sindhi daily Kawish, they said, had been missing since July 2. In March, Mukesh Ropeta and Sanjay Kumar of KTN were picked up by law-enforcement agencies from Jacobabad and they were produced for remand in July.

    Electronic media employee Muneer Mengal, who had arrived in Karachi from Dubai about six months ago, was whisked away as he came out of the airport lounge and his whereabouts are not known yet. During the last two weeks, Maqbool Hussain Sayal and Taimoor Khan were killed in DI Khan and Wana respectively.

    In the latest case of victimisation, Shakeel Anjum of The News has been implicated in a triple murder case by an SHO of Islamabad whose involvement in extra-judicial killing was exposed by the reporter. [/quote]

    Well, they are not Daniel Pearl when the whole state machinery had nothing to do for a week and was involved in tracing his whereabouts on a war footing.

  15. Samdani says:
    September 22nd, 2006 10:53 am

    I am surprised by the silence in the US media and offical circles to the interview yesterday… no response at all…. or am I missing something? Maybe we will hear of it once the Musharraf meets Bush today in the White House?

  16. PatExpat says:
    September 22nd, 2006 11:31 am

    Samdani, well you finally heard it. Bush said he was taken aback from the harshness of the words. He was informed by Colin Powell that Musharraf understands that time has come to side with USA. For all he knew, Musharraf was the first president to side with Bush in this time of need. Suddenly, he moved from an undemocratic army general (once lectured by Bill Clinton on democracy on a stopover to India) to most allied ally.

    Just can’t wait for the remaining revelations in his book.

  17. Arsalan Ali says:
    September 22nd, 2006 1:18 pm

    our president has become quite the celebrity!

  18. Samdani says:
    September 22nd, 2006 2:36 pm

    For those in the US, CSPAN (in most places) is right now carrying Musharraf’s speech at georgetown Univeristy live…. wideranging speech touching on every aspect

  19. Adnan Ahmad says:
    September 22nd, 2006 3:18 pm

    Folks, How about the arresting correlation between his above statements and the title of his book. Simon & Schuster is a powerhouse but I really didn’t imagine they could or would orchestrate something as grand as this tour. I guess they are seeing a million copies sold here.

  20. Eidee Man says:
    September 22nd, 2006 8:37 pm

    yes, I’m watchig the C-Span right now as well! Interestingly, his wife is also making a speech…which is kind of weird because she is talking about him..i.e. praising him…this is only going to reinforce the stereotype of Pakistani women being subordinate to their husbands.

  21. Eidee Man says:
    September 22nd, 2006 9:10 pm

    This is incredible. For those of who you watched C-Span…Musharraf acted out in a very undignified manner…making racist remarks against Native Americans!!!

    What’s up with the other guy walking up and interrupting him….this is terrible representation for Pakistan and makes us look like a bunch of jokers.

  22. BD says:
    September 22nd, 2006 11:48 pm

    making racist remarks against Native Americans!!!

    eh? elaborate! :O

  23. BD says:
    September 23rd, 2006 1:34 am

    Just discovered on youtube

    Musharraf Bush press conference

    Part2-3: Contains a question about the Armitage threat.

  24. September 23rd, 2006 1:47 am

    Thansk BD.
    Folks, I have added these three videos of the White House press conference to the post above. Just scroll above if you wish to view them here.

  25. pindiwalla says:
    September 23rd, 2006 3:11 pm

    Attended the Prez’s address to the Washington DC community yesterday. His directness was shockingly refreshing as he provided an update on domestic as well as other geo-political issues. Whether intentional or not – the address was full of wit, ancedotes and stories that had the entire crowd of over 400 people in stitches quite a few times.

    Adil – see if you can get the video from the Pak mission in DC. They were recording the session.

  26. Adnan Ahmad says:
    September 23rd, 2006 4:10 pm

    Eidee Man,
    I don’t think it was stereotyping pakistani women. In such settings it is ok for the wife to introduce the husband even though I think she did just an ok job. The stunt from the minister to come up and speak also shed light on a very human and approachable side of the ruler, who is technically a dictator. Could anyone do that to Zia and Ayub? I don’t think so. Despite the “jee sir” realities of Islamabd I think it was a good PR stunt.

    He did capture my attention as well with his frankness and directness at the GW event. I wonder if anyone could ask him about Sherpaos, Chaudris and the use of these certified criminals in his government. I think glass will be more than half-filled if these crooks weren’t there. People close to him argue that they are a political need but I say it is a lose lose situation to have them along given their “long” track criminal record.

  27. Daktar says:
    September 23rd, 2006 5:44 pm

    Adnan, Eidee Man, maybe one of you coudl explain for the rest of us what the incident with the Minister was about?

  28. Eidee Man says:
    September 23rd, 2006 6:30 pm

    I agree with you mostly. However, I think it would have been better if his wife had spoken about one of the many other issues instead of praising her husband.

    I love Musharraf’s directness, but at times he came across as a bit less dignified than I would have liked.

    Pindiwalla, if you were there, I was wondering if you or your fellow students did not use the opportunity to ask a MEANINGFUL question such as whether or not Musharraf will allow mainstream parties to come back to the political fold now that we have seen the disasters of the MQM and the MMA.

  29. Mast Qalandar says:
    September 23rd, 2006 6:39 pm

    Musharraf is much more intereting to listen to than any of his ministers or advisors around him including Shaukat Aziz. I am sure he will do well on his TV interviews. Even his book is likely to be more interesting.

    I wonder, however, if it is ethical for him to promote his book while on a state visit. Isn’t there a conflict of interests? After all, he would be receiving money and royalties for the book, unless, of course, he plans to donate all that money to some public cause.

  30. pindiwalla says:
    September 23rd, 2006 10:04 pm

    Wasn’t at the GW event – rather the event held by the Pakistani Embassy at a local hotel. There was no Q&A session.

    Nicely organized – valet parking, more or less on time, orderly security processing and a medley of Pakistani patriotic songs. The only unfortunate thing was that I had to see and listen to a 20 year old Vital Signs video of Dil Dil Pakistan…ouch!

  31. pindiwalla says:
    September 23rd, 2006 10:12 pm

    Royalty is like 7-10% of net! So if you bought a book at Amazon today — the General got $1.60 – can’t even get a Big Mac for that…

    His advance is probably under $600K on this…That won’t even get you a 2 marla plot in Islamabad these days…

    I do think the Gov’t should pay him since he will be providing so much publicity for “Brand Pakistan”.

  32. Pakistani says:
    September 24th, 2006 12:07 am

    The advance for the book was a reported $1 Million. Author’s royalty is usually tiered and rises with number of sales and can be as high as 18%, but even if its the range you mention, and assuming 1 million copies sold (which is quite likely), that would be a $1.6 Million, or (much) more.

    I am not sure what ‘brand Pakistan’ is, but I hope it is something better than the picture of a military dictator bumbling his way with false confidence. But you are right. Not just the govt. of Pakistan but the people or Pakistan are paying for his antics; mostly through their noses!

  33. nuzhat aziz says:
    September 24th, 2006 12:37 am

    Obviously the general is in his element here in the US…he is in his constituency; The charm, the suit and the schtick for the goras and the jootas, wardi and stick for the Pakistanis at home.

  34. PatExpat says:
    September 24th, 2006 1:37 am

    The question is, if Armitage had not threatened Musharraf, would he have still taken 180 degree turn on Taliban. I believe YES. He was dying to get credibility for his rule.

    At least he could have taken the chiefs of other armed forces in confidence beforet taking such a step. But knowing him, he kept the Airforce uninformed when he staretd the Kargil fiasco.

    Though we are all excited about getting his book because it will contain lot of revelations, yet nobody seems to wonder would any lesser mortal had been allowed to publish his memoirs while in office. Where is the National Interest or National Security that Musharraf touts so often?

    Mukhtaran Mai was not allowed to travel to US because she would tarnish Pakistan’s image. How does Pakistan’s image appear now when the nuclear power of the world (wanting to be treated at par with India) took a 180 degree turn over a threat from Deputy Secretary of State?

  35. PatExpat says:
    September 24th, 2006 2:18 pm

    By the way, we don’t need US bombs to take us back to stone age. KESC and WAPDA can do the same job – thank you very much. Meanwhile the PM is busy calling him in USA sucking up to him while the whole of the country is in total darkness.

    This is called economic progress.

  36. Shivam says:
    September 24th, 2006 4:31 pm

    What a cartoon this man is! The kind of things he comes up with for international PR!

  37. Trekker says:
    September 24th, 2006 6:23 pm

    Pndiwalla, I was there too at the Woodley Park Marriott address. I agree he was very candid and covered a wide range of issues ranging from Baluchistan to Hudood. His opening quip about wearing Kameez Shalwar and speaking English was hilarious lol. I did not take a camera with me because had gotten an email from the embassy that cameras will not be allowed — but then everyone had cameras there. Anyways, here’s a poor quality clip recorded from Geo News:

  38. Samdani says:
    September 24th, 2006 6:39 pm

    For those in the US, a reminder that his much reported interview with the Armitage mention airs today on 60 Minutes at 7PM eastern time. Look forard to people’s reactions.

  39. Daktar says:
    September 24th, 2006 10:20 pm

    Saw the 60 minutes interview. It was tough. Maybe it was the way it was edited, but he was on the defensive. A really softball interviwe of Condi Rice preceeded this. Mush was put on the mat on 9/11, then on AQ Khan, and generally.

  40. Mast Qalandar says:
    September 24th, 2006 11:38 pm

    I agree with Daktar, Musharraf’s body language showed he was not comfortable. At times he looked nervous and was on the defensive.

  41. PatExpat says:
    September 25th, 2006 1:41 am

    Something from Daily Dawn today:

    [quote post="319"]It was the fourth such national-level breakdown during the last seven years. After the breakdowns of 1999, 2000 and 2002, the government had expressed determination to conduct inquiries, fix responsibility and take culprits to task. But neither any finding was made public nor any official was taken to task.

    Sunday’s breakdown was also followed by identical reaction – the minister of water and power and the prime minister ordering inquiries, asking Wapda to submit a report in the next 48 hours.

    In all three previous reports, sources said, experts had blamed grossly-overloaded transmission system and suggested new projects to augment it. No individual was held responsible during the last three breakdowns, but the blame was squarely put on the weak system.

    Keeping in view the previous experience, sources said the authority would again blame the over-stretched transmission system and suggest a few more projects.[/quote]

    Another quip:

    [quote post="319"]Mr Armitage who met Gen Musharraf in his hotel in Washington insisted that he had never used such a language and President Bush who met the general at the White House also expressed surprise at the revelation and asked “why now after five years and why in New York? “The answer, to quote President Bush, is: “He wants you to buy his book.â€

  42. bhitai says:
    September 25th, 2006 1:53 am

    couldn’t the threat have been to Mushy’s own rule rather than to Pakistan? After all, what makes more sense (and is *much* cheaper): regime change or bombing an intact country (with no oil) to stone age? it’s not that the US had no allies left within pakistani establishment. I’m sure there were plenty of loyalties up for grabs.

  43. Mast Qalandar says:
    September 25th, 2006 9:07 am

    How would you guys react if Nawaz Sharif, when he was PM, had come to the US on a state visit and promoted sugar or sarya (steel rods) from one of his factories?

  44. Trekker says:
    September 25th, 2006 12:49 pm

    Clips from CBS 60 Minutes can he seen here.

  45. September 25th, 2006 3:17 pm

    Folks, here is an update of Gen. Musharraf’s media appearances that I just recieved from a friend (all times in US EST):

    Monday, Sep 25
    – “Today Show” on NBC: aired at 7:05am
    – “Hannity & Colmes” on Fox: 9-10pm
    – “Charlie Rose” on PBS: 11-12pm (date not confirmed)

    Tuesday, Sep 26
    – “The National” on Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC): aired on AIH at 6:30pm, also on National tonight at 9pm on Newsworld, 10pm on CBC
    – “Morning Edition” on NPR: 5-9am (date not confirmed)
    – “Canada AM” CTV: aired on Sep 28 at 7:40am
    – “Time” Magazine interview: story will run on 10/9 issue, on stands Monday, 10/2
    – “The Situation Room” on CNN: live ~4:15-5:15pm
    – “Daily Show” on Comedy Central: 11-11:30pm
    – Lecture at Cornell (NY): 7:30pm-

    Wednesday, Sep 27
    – “Newsnight” on BBC: 10:30pm
    – “The Times” interview: article will run on Thu, Sep 28
    – “The Independent” interview: article will run on Fri, Sep 29
    – “Meet the Press” on NBC: air on Sun Oct 1, 10:30-11:30am

  46. Samdani says:
    September 25th, 2006 11:09 pm

    For those in the US, Musharraf being interviewed on Charlie Rose (PBS) now.

  47. TURAB says:
    September 26th, 2006 3:16 pm


    Please support his book at as some jealous people are bashing the President’s book.

  48. TURAB says:
    September 26th, 2006 3:26 pm

    [quote comment="3051"]How can Musharraf allow himself to be grilled by foreign journalists and media and not allow similar freedoms to local countrymen.


    We have 45 plus channels in the country!! what more do you want? how is government responsible for every kidnapping / killing when there are people against governemt not willing to be exposed at any cost

    About the power issue. This is called growth when the demand is increasing expoenetially and we don’t have enough electricity.

    ou growth is between 6-8% every year.

    common man can afford cars, split acs, and anything now more easily than ever before.

    patexpat, can you please stop whinning and bitchin and bring in some positive critisism…..

    reminds me of those people who can never be satisfied… have you been to pakistan lately?

    can you look at things with a bit of optimism?

    can you give us time to revive from the mistakes and bad leadership of 30 odd years?

    I don’t want to debate due to lack of time but please think about the things I said.

  49. TAhir says:
    September 26th, 2006 4:10 pm

    Loking this web sites

  50. mujnoon says:
    September 26th, 2006 4:58 pm

    As I mentioned in another thread I think this is quite embarrassing to have Musharraf going around on state expense and promoting a book which is revealing inside details regarding issues that are still fluid….

    To outsiders this is unserstandably quite baffling.

    Here is a link to one such discussion:
    (Click on the link for the audio and listen to the conversation between the journalists).

  51. Owais Mughal says:
    September 26th, 2006 5:12 pm

    I just checked at and President’s book is at #6 in sales rank. I had ordered my copy 10 days ago at because they had the cheapest price and cheapest shipping.

  52. PatExpat says:
    September 26th, 2006 5:29 pm

    Turab, I loved your remark about supporting Musharraf’s book. More than that, I am enjoying the reviews and comments on about In The Line of Fire especially this one:

    [quote post="319"]You all Indians writing fake reviews “GROW UP”, September 26, 2006

    Reviewer: AA – See all my reviews

    First of all, I have a question for all hopeless and complexed Indians giving reviews on this book – How the heck you are reviewing on this book? How did you read this 300 page book in one day? The book was released on Monday 9/25/06. Another thing, please remember “THE TRUTH HURTS” especially to Indians as they cannot face the truth. This book is best seller in whole world not in USA. Mr. Musharraf tells the truth how America stop the Kargil as Indians were crying to USA to save them, how India is interfering in Pakistan’s internal affairs creating terrorism.

    Beside all this at least have some sense to face the truth? Mr. Musharrraf is the best leader in Sub-Continent. India is obsessed with Pakistan. Pakistani’s care less about India. This book is a blockbuster as it blows the cover on many aspects.

    So in the end, Please buy this book…you will love it!!! Do not listen to these crazy Indians who have never in their life had anything good to say about anyone else in the world. They are killing innocent Muslims and their is a genocide in Kashmir.

    Buy it, read it and make up your own mind…. [/quote]

    This is after the guy has read the book. I just can’t wait to get my hands on it. Cheers

  53. bhitai says:
    September 26th, 2006 5:50 pm

    “Mr. Musharrraf is the best leader in Sub-Continent”

    Is this a joke? seems like amazon readers are having a pi$$ing contest, and I wonder why you found it interesting enough to share..

  54. nuzhat aziz says:
    September 26th, 2006 6:35 pm

    This just in on GEO: Sadar ney inkishaf kiya hai ke woh bungali dosheeza key ishq mein ghiriftar thay….. as they say, loh kar lo gal.

  55. Sridhar says:
    September 26th, 2006 6:28 pm

    Here is K. Subrahmanyam’s take on the portions of the book related to the Kargil war.

    Subrahmanyam was the Chairman of the Kargil Review Committee, appointed in India after the conflict. Its report has been published and is freely available in book form. Excerpts are also available on the web.

  56. Shabir Alam says:
    September 27th, 2006 1:51 am

    Are you serious nuzhat? Regardless, who cares – its his personal business :)

  57. September 27th, 2006 1:53 am

    he is a brave man n he shows a truth he know that this truth is not good for him but Musharaf we love u all ….Pakistani people…

  58. TURAB says:
    September 27th, 2006 3:24 am

    just watched charlie rose interview, cbc interview and daily show interview……all I can say is:

    in MUSHI we TRUST…..

  59. Eidee Man says:
    September 27th, 2006 3:49 am

    hey turab, where did you see the Charlie Rose show…I wanted to look at that specifically since that guy is very slow and looks to have discussions rather than rapid-fire quiz-show sort of attacks.

    Also, if all my posts are being censored…I would like to know..if I’m no longer welcome I’ll leave.

  60. A.F.Khan says:
    September 28th, 2006 6:06 pm

    Let me just say I do not like Musharraf much. I wish it were anyone else except a military dictator. Benazir, Nawaz, anyone. But I am amazed at the way he has managed to get the media to focus on Pakistan at a time when so many other world leaders are also in USA. Qatar and Dubai and Malaysia and others spend millions on those CNN ads, and he creates thsi great buzz where there is all musharraf all the time everywhere. I am sad that he makes so much of it focussed on himself, but in the end it is getting a lot of (much of it good) airtime for Paksitan too. The discussion on this blog is amazingly civilized (congratulations) but on so many other places (inclduing YouTube and Amazon) you see venom forthing from Pakistan-bashers, needlessly trying to pick fights, instigate arguments, and spin everything. It woudl be funny if it were not sad. Unfortauently, too many over-eager Pakistanis become ‘jiyalas’ by falling for the traps and letting Paksitan-bashers highjack these discussions. My only wish is that the next time a Pakistani leader comes to USA it is a ‘truly’ elected one.

  61. curious says:
    September 28th, 2006 12:29 pm

    i thunk he has been great

  62. Mast Qalandar says:
    September 29th, 2006 9:24 am

    Ally you guys and gals who are into this discussion should read Ayaz Amir’s column in today’s Dawn. Here is the link:

  63. Suleman says:
    October 1st, 2006 10:52 am

    Just saw Prez on “Meet the Press” . Great job. Short and sweet. Very composed and addressed the questions very well, I think he handled himself well considering Tim Russert can be a bit abrupt at times and has been with other world leaders. Although, Tim Russert didn’t even bother to mention Prez in his highlights as one of the guests for today. Highlights, tend to come prior to the show for viewers to know who will be or what will be the topic for the show, he mentioned everyone, but Musharraf. I think Mush did very well to put Karzai in place too. Nice work!

  64. Suleman says:
    October 1st, 2006 10:56 am

    On a different note, Mush’s media blitz has been very successful to land him a spot on last nights SNL skit. Whether we agree of him promoting his book or not on gov’t tour, the fact that he made it on SNL and someone mocking him selling his book as well as being pro-Bush shows he was successful in his media campaign, which all in all is beneficial for us branding us Pakistanis better then the bias image we have received so far from the mainstream media. So kudoos to him on this strategy there “mission accomplished”. BTW, the actor did a good job being Mush on SNL. :)

  65. PatExpat says:
    October 1st, 2006 11:24 am

    [quote post="319"]So kudoos to him on this strategy there “mission accomplishedâ€

  66. Mast Qalandar says:
    October 1st, 2006 12:07 pm


    You are so right, how desperate and eager we are to get any positive Western press. But, at the same time, we give a damn to our own public opinion. Nevertheless, read today’s Ardeshir Cosasjee’s column in Dawn:

  67. Farrukh says:
    October 1st, 2006 1:39 pm

    Now that you mention it, the divide is striking. One might have expected an inverted U-curve. But it is probably correct. We are on this and other things a divided society, there is no concentration in the middle, its at the edges. That is why our conversations are also edgy.

    I dont think its about expats and those living in Pakistan either. They are equally divided. Those abroad just export the divisions with them.

  68. Farrukh says:
    October 1st, 2006 1:44 pm

    Oops. Last comment went to the wrong post. Moderator, please remove from here.

  69. Hassaan M. Qureshi says:
    October 2nd, 2006 12:02 pm

    Just read some extracts from his book.I want to say tht he is the person who degraded A Q Khan.I mean a person who was a hero for us and by mush “he is a person by massive ego A Q Khan is a person tht dont let any one to be one step ahead of him… and all tht A Q Khan done was for money” I think this is very ridiculous remarks about a person who had made u an atomic power…In india Abdul kalam Azad was as A Q khan is for us and indians made him their president though he was a muslim too and we pakistanis have a custom to riducule the one who has done gud 4 us….

  70. Ismail says:
    October 3rd, 2006 8:17 pm

    No matter which side of the argument you are on, I would be very interested in somehow finding out just how many people have – or ever will – actually READ the book. Not read something about the book, but read the book itself. Reading is not exactly something we do very often. Interesting how that never comes in the way of our having an opinion!

  71. Yaseen says:
    October 3rd, 2006 1:19 am

    AQ Khan is no longer a hero. For personal gain, he stole and sold national secrets, brought us a bad name and put the country in grave danger. On this one I think Musharraf is right.

  72. Yahya says:
    October 2nd, 2006 2:13 pm

    Dr Shafiq’s interview (Urdu); Goto and link is on the left.

  73. MQ says:
    October 2nd, 2006 5:03 pm

    Hassaan Qureshi,

    Heroes, in all cultures, are not free of weaknesses. Some have questionable private affairs, some are ruthless in personal lives, some are even known to have robbed —the rich and given to the poor (Robin Hood). People tolerate such weaknesses and traits of character in their heroes. But in no culture in history a true hero is known to have sold his country’s assets or secrets for personal gains.

    AQKhan is accused of selling countires secrets and assets for personal gain. That’s the charge sheet Musharraf has brought against him. And AQKhan has never denied it. Instead he asked for a pardon, which was given.

    Whether one is Musharraf’s supporter or his critic it is difficult to fault Musharraf on this one account.

    Comparing AQK with India’s Abdul Kalam (not Azad) is not right. Abdul Kalam was a self-effacing man who kept a low profile, lived a simple life while carrying on his work, and never publicized or promoted himself. No one even knew his name inside or outside the country until just before he was nominated the president. On the other hand, AQK was all over the place giving statements to the press, encouraging journalists to write his biographies, and naming after him laboratories, schools, streets and towns. These are not the traits of true heroes.

  74. Suleman says:
    October 3rd, 2006 12:36 am

    PatExpat, Mast Qalandar

    I think we are referring to 2 different issues at hand 1) Mushrraf publishing his book 2) his media blitz while in the USA. Although I agree his media coverage focused on his book, but like I stated earlier his appearances in several prime shows in the usa is overall a positive for us Pakistanis irrespective of Pakistani American or not. If you reside in the USA you will get a better sense of how in present day Pakistan is being portrayed in the media, synonymous to being extremists, osama supporters even though we are US’ key ally in this war. This perception of Pakistan although inaccurate continues to be shared among the average American and it is not till Mushrraf’s visit and his media blitz that the average American got to see a different angle towards Pakistan. Hence, my comments, this is not to say, that I support Mushrraf’s book, but rather his bold handling of journalists as well as approach to being invited to all mainstream shows, which cover most demographics.
    In a country, where the driving force to alter public opinion drives from the media, it is nice to see Mushrraf represent Pakistan and provide some fact time to provide some a different point of view on our stance and perspective on the War on Terror.
    And with media playing such a key role, it is not “how desperate we are” to see positive press , but to see some objectivity in journalism here, which has nowadays really been flooded to echo one point of view.

  75. October 3rd, 2006 3:28 am

    Musharraf said qadir is a rascal thus we should believe in his words, right Yaseen?Qadeer had a Jet plane which he used to control to transfer stuff here and there. Our army men were in Raiwind at that time to seek Allah’s help so that they can be victorious over our Dushman India.

    Ye tera Pakistan hey na Mera Pakistan hay
    Ye uska Pakistan hey Jo Sadar-e-Pakistan Hey

  76. October 3rd, 2006 3:32 am

    Majority of this thread highly influenced with media crap like Foxnews which claims Osama attacks on WTC because they ‘saw’ a video.

  77. PatExpat says:
    October 3rd, 2006 6:11 am


    Nobody is denying that building or changing a country’s image requires certain amount of spin. And to a society which is oblivious to the happenings in the rest of the world unless informed by the likes of FOX, CNN, etc. positive press can definitely help.

    However, the rest of the world has a lot more sources of news and information and it relies on them. To the Pakistanis or otherwise living outside US, nothing has changed neither on the ground nor the image of Pakistan.

    If Musharraf can change the image of Pakistan overnight by a few media appearances, it will take much less to bring the image back to where it was.

    Hypothetically speaking, a few exclusive Alqaeda reports, an embedded journalist reporting from Waziristan or Afghanistan is all what is required. Actual claims of Pakistan’s involvement in Mumbai bomb blasts or Musharraf’s own admissions like claiming we received money from US for turning in captives (what about the big claim that stakes have changed) or that retired ISI generals are presently supporting Taliban (more than ISI, it reflects badly on Musharraf and Pakistan) or claiming that AQKhan arranged for shipment of 80 tons of materials without anybody’s knowledge (they used C-130s. Can you believe the AQ Khan would have moved 80 ton of material in the trunk of his car or C-130 could have landed in Pakistan without involvement of Army and Airforce). If the media highlights these issues, the whole image (in US) is down the drain.

    We are definitely happy that Pakistan got positive coverage. What surprises us is that you are only looking at the side which will not last much long. We all know how good CNN, FOX are at these things. If that happens, nobody would recall how Musharraf came across in those interviews (except of course for us Pakistanis) and his book would meet the same fate as that of his predecessor’s Friends Not Masters. Though it generated great controversy which made it a best seller yet it does not have much credibility.

  78. Suleman says:
    October 3rd, 2006 10:19 am

    Pat Expat,
    I’m in agreement with you on this one, I commented at the momemnt, ofcourse as people start reading his book, all this is revealed, yes, I agree it is questionable how much the book is causing harm, and what Mush was thinking when he wrote it. I’m not taking a blind stand, as daily news and statements change the course and image for everyone to ponder what to think of Pakistan. For whatever it’s worth I state, that for his brief visit and his encounter with media, that moment in time was well handled. Today or tomorrow is a different case, no doubt.

    I’m even surprised at this blog and how people are actually ready to call AQ Khan a traitor, I think they are fairly naive on to the “art of politics”.

    I’ll leave it at that .

    P.S. I haven’t read the book yet to comment on all his confessions other then reading what the news stories are quoting out of it yet to elaborate my views there.

  79. Mast Qalandar says:
    October 3rd, 2006 10:38 am


    I don’t think anyone has gone to the extent of calling Qadeer Khan a traitor. But from all the news and accusations against him, none of which have been denied by Khan so far, he does not seem to be cast in the mould of a hero.

  80. Hassaan M. Qureshi says:
    October 3rd, 2006 12:52 pm

    i respect mq’s opinion, everybody has a right to hold and express his own opinion. But at the same time i would like to direct my friend’s attention towards the fact which might prove to be useful to build a moderate and neutral opinion. First of all we should be clear that AQ Khan has been made a scape goat by our establishment. It is another sacrifice by AQK that he did not release any press statement so that Pakistan may not be sanctioned by the US. There is no doubt that AQK alone cannot transfer any material to any nation without any assisstance of the forces and the establishment. Therefore, to curse AQK alone for atomic proliferation is morally, ethically and legally blunder.
    I agree that AQK acquired a lot of wealth and lived like lords,don’t you think that the person who has given Pakistan atomic power deserves certain previliges. What about those boorish army generals who belong to humble backgrounds, come in to the service penniless and when they retire . they retire as billionaires. Is there anybody top question those white elephants. All mighty buildings you see in blue area islamabad are of generals and brigadiers, is there any accountability court for them??? has anybody of been disgraced by anybody like AQK. What about genral niazi and other incompetent officers who sell off our secrets to our enemy???
    I was with MUsharaf in the beginning,,,but now on ething is clear, he is spoiling the whole nation. He is degrading us and ridiculing our values. He is spoling the political culture and everybody knows that he wants to rule till his death.
    Friends, please feel the gravity of the situation and pull him down. If MUSH is becoming popular in the western media , it does not mean that he is bringing any honour to the country. He is simply a puppet in the hands of western leaders, especially of BUSH.
    Thanks !

    Waiting for your comments…..

  81. MQ says:
    October 3rd, 2006 1:49 pm

    [quote comment="3650"]
    “I agree that AQK acquired a lot of wealth and lived like lords,don’t you think that the person who has given Pakistan atomic power deserves certain previliges?” [/quote]

    Hassaan Qureshi,

    If all that wealth had been bestowed upon him by the state in recognition of his services or if he had acquired it legally and transparently through personal investments then I wouldn’t grudge or question his wealth or his lifestyle. But if that wealth was acquired illegally using his influence and position then that is illegal and immoral — actually a felony in legal terms — just as it would be illegal and immoral for a general or a judge to acquire that kind of wealth. It is doubly immoral in the case of AQK because he was treated as a hero by the nation, and heroes are not supposed to steal.

    Another myth that we should get rid of is that he alone gave us the atomic power. In fact, this is a myth which AQK himself created. Atomic power is not something that one person can develop single handedly. First and foremost it requires political will and support and diverting of national resources to it. Those decisons were taken by the successive politicians. And then it requires scores of dedicated scientists, technologists and technicians. AQK happened to be one of those technologists except that he was equally, if not more, dedicated to his own person.

  82. PatExpat says:
    October 3rd, 2006 2:56 pm


    Pakistan did not come into being in nine months or nine years. The seeds were sown before Quaid was even born or joined Muslim League. There were other politicians, Iqbal’s vision, Aligarh educated Muslims, sacrifice of hundreds of thousands of ordinary muslims that led to the development of Pakistan. This does not mean that Quaid is not Father of the Nation.

    From the many interviews, newspaper articles and books that I have read over the years, I have never read that A Q Khan describe himself as father of the bomb. Time and again I have read him giving credit to the extensive support received from Zulfi Bhutto, Zia ul Haq, other politicians, his team of dedicated scientists working in minimal conditions (I have myself heard these praises) and his trusted network of suppliers. But because of instrumental role played by AQ Khan, he has been bestowed a title of Father of the bomb. I don’t think in times of state media (PTV) only, he could have garnered that title without complete support of the government.

    And unless the government comes out with proof that he has diverted resources for his well being and gives him a chance to defend himself, I will respect him for giving us the bomb. Why is it that AQKhan can’t defend his dignity because of national security and our president can tour all over the world spilling beans blurting out one half truth after another slinging mud at every civillian politician/ruler. I am surprised that he left two Quaids out(Quaid-e-Azam and Quaid-e-Tehreek Altaf Hussain. Is it because he himself is a Muhajir or because he has his own ax to grind in Sind).

    It has been a while since I heard Mush uttering national security or national interest in his speech. Its like he has removed that word from his vocabulary just to promote his book.

  83. Aziz Akhmad says:
    October 3rd, 2006 4:18 pm


    Have you noticed that the THE BOOK has already dropped out of the charts? It hasn’t been even a week since the book was launched and it is nowhere to be seen on the Bestsellers list of

  84. MQ says:
    October 3rd, 2006 4:31 pm

    “… This does not mean that Quaid is not Father of the Nation.”


    Do not quite agree with your analogy. Were there no Jinnah on the scene it was extremely unlikely that Pakistan would have born.

    It is not true for the “bum”.

  85. Faarabi says:
    October 3rd, 2006 4:49 pm

    “I am surprised that he left two Quaids out(Quaid-e-Azam and Quaid-e-Tehreek Altaf Hussain. Is it because he himself is a Muhajir or because he has his own ax to grind in Sind)…”

    PatExpat, We know you are a PPP supporter who could not wait to see BB in power but I think you went on a stretch here by bringing in ethnicity in this way. This is a potential flamer and would only hurt this blog. ATP also did a poll that inculded BB and NS (your two guardians of democracy); please refer to that and see how many votes they received. To add to MQ’s post a close associate of Gandhi, I believe, once said that had congress had one Jinnah and Muslim League even a dozen Nehrus, pakistan’s existance would have been unlikely.

  86. PatExpat says:
    October 3rd, 2006 6:12 pm

    Apologies for bringing in the racial issue but I am the so called Muhajir myself and everybody knows that mostly Muhajirs are anti BB and anti NS even when they are anti MQM. For them is clear (either they will vote for MQM or dont vote at all). Obviously I am generalizing to make a point.

    In the earlier post, I was just highlighting the fact that he did not criticize in his book the convicted criminals that are part of Sind government. Why leave them out when you are slinging mud at every other politician?

    Regarding Mush himself being a muhajir, he made a speech in Karachi where he repeated quite a few times “mein aap mein say hoon, mein aap jaisa hoon” (alluding to the fact that he also has Muhajir roots).

    On my various comments about Benazir becoming PM, its my belief that if fair elections are held, she will become PM not because I want it but because majority of the population will vote for her.

  87. Aziz Akhmad says:
    October 3rd, 2006 6:22 pm

    Sorry, my earlier comment was not factually correct. I had looked up only the top 25 best selling books on the chart and “In the Line of Fire” was not there. Further search revealed that it has climbed down to number 33. Two days after the launch it was at number 3.

  88. Faarabi says:
    October 3rd, 2006 9:01 pm

    “..(alluding to the fact that he also has Muhajir roots)..”

    What roots are you talking about? If it is what I eluded to then you are again being derogatory to a racial group. If not then half of pakistan has those roots and there is nothing wrong with that. In fact we were just talking about the mohajirs of punjab in an other thread.

    It is quite a belief that you have regarding bb winning the election. What makes you so affirmative? Don’t you think 88 and 93 are distant memories and a repeat even in sindh is unlikely. She has had very little to do with the growth seen in punjab and frontier in the last decade and anyone’s guess is as good as mine as to how she would do there. If your stance throughout has been based on this belief then I think it is sad to say the least. Can you please give us a few links of what good BB did for pakistan as opposed to what harm musharraf caused her? I think it is not fair to use the facade of democracy to sell PPP’s agenda. Because in the end it has been good for nothing not even for roti or kapra or makan.

  89. October 4th, 2006 12:17 am

    [quote post="319"]He is simply a puppet in the hands of western leaders, especially of BUSH[/quote]

    Pakistani Karzai? :>

  90. Hassaan M. Qureshi says:
    October 4th, 2006 2:36 pm

    PatExpat I completely agree with u in response to the MQ’s views.
    According to my interpretation of MQ’s opinion,Abdul Qadeer was a thief,but a person(Musharraf) who bought a bloody period of dictatorship again in the history of pakistan,a person who want pakistan a pro-american enlightened moderate state…a person who killed his own muslim brothers and country men in baluchistan and waziristan…a person who humilated all the leaders b4 him and entitled A Q as a “greedy man” should be a hero 4 us….
    It seems tht WAR ON TERRORISM of musharaff is suspecting every pakistani citizen as a terrorist.This idea of war on terrorism has bought such a bad name 4 pakistan tht an ordinary person considers pakistan as a state of terrorists
    I feel sorry for A q khan … I think we shud not deserve to be an atomic power.A Q Khan shud not have done it for “pakistan”…

  91. Daktar says:
    October 4th, 2006 3:13 pm

    Hassaan. Why doesd it have to be binary? Maybe they are BOTH theifs? If you oppose AQ, that does not mean you HAVE to support Mush. This may be teh one and only thing he is right on.

    Being an Atomic power has not been really useful. Do you earn a higher salary because off it? Are your kids schools better? Are you morre safe? Not really on any of the above. You get bragging rights, but the fact is no one really cares. The only way they care is in that they trust us even less.

  92. MQ says:
    October 4th, 2006 3:42 pm


    You got me wrong. I am no admirer of dictators — of any variety. All I was saying was that true heroes do not steal or smuggle. Also, when faced with adversity they don’t easily cave in.(ZAB became a hero even to his opponents becuase he refused to ask for a pardon in the face of imminent death.) But our “hero” did all these things.

  93. MQ says:
    October 4th, 2006 5:10 pm
  94. PatExpat says:
    October 5th, 2006 2:33 am


    Mastering nuclear technology does not mean that you have to use it for bomb making only. If the government wants, they can use it for making nuclear power plants. AQ Khan and his team ensured that we have capability to use nuclear energy.

    With shortage of energy in the country, will we harness nuclear technology or like BB, sign dubious agreements involving kickbacks with IPPs (Independent Power Producers) for generating power through oil (imported at huge expense) or gas (already a shortage is predicted in a few years as we are planning pipelines from Qatar etc) or coal (of which we have ample reserves but still can’t figure out how to use the high sulfur content material for efficient generation of power)

    Regarding your question, are we more safe. Well, that much even Musharraf admits that now we have minimum nuclear deterrence which makes us safer.


    My contention in AQKhan episode is that he is not allowed to tell his side of story or defend the accusations levelled against him. Regarding the official pardon, he could have been made a scapegoat in national interest(just a theory).

    If the President and Commander of the self proclaimed one of the best Armed Forces in the world and a nuclear power can take a 180 degree turn overnight from a threat received from not the president, nor the vice president nor the secretary of state but from deputy secretary of state, why can’t AQKhan ask for pardon if pressured by the President (again just a theory?). As mentioned earlier, the amount of stuff that he is said to have exported (more than 50 tons) could not have been done without using C-130s which in turn cannot land or take off without the permission of Pakistan Army or Airforce which means that Army and Airforce.

    Musharraf has profited immensely at the expense of national exchequer by telling his side of story. Why not afford similar opportunity to others. At least, they won’t use tax payers money.

  95. Ali Nawab says:
    October 5th, 2006 6:59 am

    Mush should go now , he is himslef a big terrorist and like hijacker he has hijacked whole pakistan.

  96. MQ says:
    October 5th, 2006 1:11 pm

    [quote comment="3720"]

    “My contention in AQKhan episode is that he is not allowed to tell his side of story or defend the accusations levelled against him. Regarding the official pardon, he could have been made a scapegoat in national interest(just a theory).”

    My contention in AQKhan episode is that he is not allowed to tell his side of story or defend the accusations levelled against him. Regarding the official pardon, he could have been made a scapegoat in national interest (just a theory).

    My answer to this is, he had a choice to refuse to apologize, that is, if he was not guilty of wrongdoing. After all he was a national “hero”. Heroes don’t cave in under threats. (Remember the ZAB example?) One cannot forget the pathetic image of a contrite looking Khan apologizing to the nation and asking for a pardon on the natioanl TV.

    I have said it before and will say it again that stealing for personal gains cannot be justified for any reason — except, perhaps, if one is starving and steals some food to survive. AQK was not exactly starving. And we are not talking of some petty theft.

    And, by the way, Musharraf’s wrongs do not make AQK’s right.

  97. Hassaan M. Qureshi says:
    October 5th, 2006 4:05 pm

    MQ the point is tht we pakistanis have a habit of disgracing our heroes.It hurts when u refers the word “steal” with AQK.In the history of this country evry1 has repented on what he has given good to pakistan.i m just saying tht y the hell r u ppl backing musharaff on the AQK stance.You know he has said AQK as a greedy person in front of whole media just to get promo o his book.He has crossed limits…I heard sher afgan niazi sayin tht musharaff shud be praised tht how tactfully he settled the chapter of A Q khan.i think he should be slammed instead of praised of declaring A Q khan as a theif and closing the chapter…
    Secondly u guyz be logical tht A Q khan carrying those materials to N.Korea and iran and our army watching whole drama…These are not chocolates packets tht u r loading on C-130′s and loading to iran and N.korea.If A Q khan is involved he should have been backed by whole of the armed forces and intelligence.This isnt a single handed move…Be sensible
    Instead of AQK,we should apologize him….

  98. Faarabi says:
    October 5th, 2006 4:25 pm

    The very reasons govt. can’t lay hands on AQK can be seen in this thread. Emotions often get the better of pakistanis. MQ I think pretty much covered the entire saga in his posts and I couldn’t agree more with him.

  99. PatExpat says:
    October 5th, 2006 4:46 pm


    Had AQKhan refused to apologize, all the blame for nuclear technology transfer would have fallen on Pakistan Army and Pakistan Airforce. Western media rather than blaming the rogue scientist would have been blaming the rogue nation or the rogue army and sanctions would have been imposed on us like North Korea or Iran.

    It would have been humiliating for Mush, Pakistan Army and Pakistan. It would have meant no F-16s (would not have made a difference as we are getting them at humiliating terms anyway). So to save the nation from humiliation, AQ Khan has offered his own humiliation (A theory). I don’t expect such selfless behaviour from an army man who doesn’t even give up his uniform despite committing to do so.

    I am not at all claiming AQKhan is innocent. I am just suggesting he be afforded a chance to tell his story and defend the accusations. If he is proven a thief, renounce him all you want. But don’t consider the public apology as admission of guilt. Its universally accepted that confession under pressure is not admissible as evidence.

    Similarly, ZAB may be a hero to you but to a lot of people he is a villain; catalyst in the seperation of East Pakistan on record for saying that he will break the leg of politicians who travelled to East Pakistan. But thats a different topic altogether.

  100. MQ says:
    October 5th, 2006 6:21 pm


    First of all, ZAB was never my hero and I haven’t said it in any of my comments. I did, however, develop sympathy and respect for him when he died — the way he was killed and the way he faced death. And again, pointing out faults of Bhutto or Musharraf would not wash away the sins of your “hero”.

    Secondly, your “theories” or rather conjectures about the selflessness of your “hero” sound a bit far fetched. From his material acquistions and lifestyle, the news of which had been making the rounds of Islamabad much before his detention, he didn’t look like the type of person who would carry the cross for someone else.

  101. Adnan Ahmad says:
    October 5th, 2006 8:10 pm

    I think I had mentioned earlier in another discussion AQK’s acquisitions of expensive property and his need for fame. The joke was that if there was an inaugration taking place of any sort of anything and anywhere AQK would want to be there to cut the ribbon and stamp his name on the event and the building, if there was one. Cawasjee took specific note of it long before people knew of his real sources of income.

    PatExpat, I think, for once, you can’t make this about Musharraf.

  102. jyoti says:
    October 6th, 2006 3:25 am

    “Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf’s much-discussed book In the Line of Fire is full of typos with the Pakistani capital spelt as “Islam Bad” and the Indian prime minister as “Manmo Ham Singh”.

  103. PatExpat says:
    October 6th, 2006 4:01 am

    A few quotes from the article. you can read the full by visiting the website.

    [quote post="319"]What that meant for me – and hundreds of others seized in this way – was kidnap, abduction, false imprisonment and ultimately, torture.

    If, as Musharraf claims, he wants to bring his country into line with those who understand and apply common notions of decency and humanity under the law, how is it that he has ordered the abduction and arbitrary detention of so many?

    It is with the sound knowledge of Pakistan’s human-rights record that the Bush administration has exploited another developing country leader who, when it comes to the rights of the individual, has little respect and even fewer morals. [/quote]

  104. Suleman says:
    October 12th, 2006 1:19 pm

    Can anyone provide link to Ali Quli Khan’s response to Prez in dawn ? Can you please tell me the date and location where I can find his detailed rebuttal to Prez’s statement in his memoir.

  105. PatExpat says:
    October 12th, 2006 3:29 pm

    The link to Ali Quli Khan letter here

  106. qaiser says:
    October 14th, 2006 1:36 am

    speaking of ‘line of fire’, thre is this supposed coup plot on Musharraf by Air Force Officers recently.. and teh rockets they found… at least his critics are saying it may be staged …

  107. October 12th, 2006 5:18 pm

    Suleman, in looking for the original source, I found the following:

    (a) A report from Rahimullah Yusufzai of The News, who interviewed Ali Kuli Khan on this (here).
    (b) A report, also in The News, who reproduces Ali Kuli Khan’s statement (here).

  108. October 16th, 2006 12:16 am

    Update for those who may be interested.

    1) The Urdu version of Gen. Musharraf’s book is expected to hit bookstands on October 21. The Urdu title is ‘Sub se pehlay Pakistan’ (i.e., ‘Pakistan First’) and it is published by Ferozsons Publishers.

    2) Simon and Schuster is planning to bring out the 4th edition of the English version. Reportedly it has now sold over 70,000 copies. Some 28,000 in India and Pakistan.

  109. Daktar says:
    October 16th, 2006 4:03 am

    Does anyone know what the price of the urdu version of the book will be in Pakistan?

  110. Farrukh says:
    October 19th, 2006 12:29 pm

    It seems that someone has placed the ENTIRE book by Gen. Musharraf – In The Line of Fire – for free download in PDF format on the Internet. I am not sure how long teh downloadable version will be there, but in case you want to you can download it at:

  111. October 30th, 2006 8:21 am

    Monday, October 30, 2006

    Musharraf’s 18-day visit priciest ever

    WASHINGTON: The 18-day visit of President Pervez Musharraf to the US and three other countries may have been one of the most expensive undertaken by any Pakistani head of state or government in the last 59 years. In New York, the president and his entourage stayed at the Roosevelt Hotel, which is far from being one of the city’s best, yet the bill for his delegation was over $500,000, according to a source with information. Twenty-eight limousines plus two vans were hired for the delegation which cost the Pakistani taxpayer $375,000. While some limousines were placed on duty round the clock, others were hired for 10-hour shifts. Figures for the president’s two visits to Washington are not known. On the first leg, the entire delegation – barring some members of the official media – stayed at one of the district’s most expensive hotels, the Four Seasons, where a single room can cost $500 or more. The PIA aircraft carrying the president remained parked in New York and for a couple of days at Washington. The president also toured Texas for a physical check-up. In calculating costs, what will need to be taken into account, first, is how much revenue PIA lost by the 18-day loss of one of its passenger aircraft. To that figure should be added airport parking charges and fuel costs wherever he travelled. Some members of the delegation travelled from Pakistan and returned there by commercial flights. He also visited Belgium, Cuba and the UK but the costs of those visits are not known. khalid hasan

    Daily Times

  112. Wise king says:
    November 7th, 2006 12:32 pm

    What was the point of posting that article? So, yes, Musharrafs visit was pricey. Did Mr. Hasan, whom I always suspected is a lover of BB and her ‘democratic’ PPP, go with Musharraf to all the meetings he had with investors and various groups where he was trying to promote Pakistans economy and asking them to invest, of which many have already said yes to? Investment in the billions is worth more the last time I checked than half a million dollars. Perhaps a simple course in logic and math would help.

  113. PatExpat says:
    November 8th, 2006 12:44 am


    If the foreign investment that you are referring to is coming in the form of selling national property i.e., coastlines, islands with no regard for social and environmental impact; I believe we can do without such investment. We don’t need initiation in maths to come to that conclusion.

    From DAWN,
    [quote post="319"]The price of sugar will rise in the wake of a recent agreement between the government and sugar mill owners.

    The sugar price rose mainly because the government decided not to release its imported sugar stock in the open market as part of its agreement with the powerful millers’ lobby[/quote]

    If the locals can get away with this with government’s connivance, you can be sure that the so called foreign investors will not bring any positive benefits to the economy.

  114. Mohammad Asif says:
    December 4th, 2006 1:16 am

    Dear all,

    here is the link for the FREE DOWNLOAD of the book

  115. Tahir ABBAS says:
    December 6th, 2006 5:55 am

    Hello everybody
    i am looking for the download link
    for Urdu verion of musharaf book

    Sab saiy pahley pakistan

    please do share it



  116. Umar Shah says:
    December 14th, 2006 2:33 am

    Just an fyi for Bradistan Calling, Roosevelt Hotel is owned by PIA, yes Pakistan International Airlines which explains why it’s not the best and why visiting Pakistani officials stay there. Maybe the $500k spent there went back to the airline. Not disagreeing with other wasteful expenditures listed by you.

  117. December 18th, 2006 12:20 pm

    in the line of fire in urdu pdf format ……send

  118. muawiya says:
    December 18th, 2006 2:25 pm

    all things said and done…i just want to know one thing and that is this…why can he not contribute the entirety of funds, including his royalty, generated from this book to Pakistan’s Treasury? It’s not like we don’t need the funds and frankly if he really wants to prove he stands in the line of fire he should also do so with his pocket! Lord knows everyone has taken more than their fair share every time they start ruling Pakistan…

  119. alvi says:
    February 28th, 2007 6:40 pm

    download full book FREE in .pdf format at:

  120. amir hassan says:
    May 18th, 2007 1:48 am

    i want to free download this book (Urdu version)how can i get it free and download easly

  121. ali says:
    June 4th, 2007 5:44 am

    nO you cant, you can get in 500rs in local book shop though…:)

  122. Mus says:
    July 16th, 2007 10:56 pm

    Of all the books that I have read,Musharraf’s self-declared autobiography is the most boring and a piece of rubbish.Not that no one wants to read his mind as if we don’t know what’s on his mind and whats in his heart.The problem with Musharraf is he speaks too much and every time he speaks he utters blundering statements which get him into more trouble.
    An average Pakistan doesn’t want to see him or hear him and to make it worse we have his book now.
    I would recommend don’t waste your money buying his book.Its too boring.

  123. June 19th, 2009 10:46 am

    ‘In The Line of Fire’ is an excellent journey to understand the role of Pakistan in shaping modern world in context of her history, resources, challenges and sacrifices. President Musharraf has boldly and openly expressed his version and vision about lot of issues. To understand why Pakistan joined war against terror after 9/11 and how Pakistan hunt the master terrorists of Al-Qaeda, its a must read book for every one. Excellent work, President Musharraf…

  124. August 29th, 2009 5:26 am

    U HAVE not mentioned the activities of your training in the PMA

  125. Usman says:
    July 4th, 2010 3:32 am

    Yes exactly, I would also like to know about your PMA training.

Have Your Say (Bol, magar piyar say)