Comments on: Benazir Bhutto: What if she had not been killed? http://pakistaniat.com/2008/12/27/benazir-bhutto-assasination-anniversary/ Pakistan. Pakistani. Pakistaniat. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:04:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: anon http://pakistaniat.com/2008/12/27/benazir-bhutto-assasination-anniversary/comment-page-6/#comment-197000 anon Sun, 14 Feb 2010 15:28:42 +0000 http://pakistaniat.com/?p=4152#comment-197000 Dear Meengla, Beautiful post! :-) Dear Meengla,

Beautiful post! :-)

]]> By: Umar Akbar http://pakistaniat.com/2008/12/27/benazir-bhutto-assasination-anniversary/comment-page-6/#comment-180907 Umar Akbar Sun, 04 Jan 2009 21:10:15 +0000 http://pakistaniat.com/?p=4152#comment-180907 Dear Aqil, Beautiful post! :-) Dear Aqil,

Beautiful post! :-)

]]> By: Aqil http://pakistaniat.com/2008/12/27/benazir-bhutto-assasination-anniversary/comment-page-6/#comment-180851 Aqil Fri, 02 Jan 2009 04:54:56 +0000 http://pakistaniat.com/?p=4152#comment-180851 @meengla and eidee man: Regardless of what we think and which possibilities we consider inconceivable or 'petty minded,' any investigation that does not include fully probing people like Musharraf, Zardari and Rehman Malik will lack credibility for obvious reasons. Let me just leave it at that. Response to Meengla's other points: It's a gross oversimplification of the entire debate to divide everything into two extremes. That either one is in favour of the political process or against it. And that if one favours the political process, then one should be sympathetic to the PPP. Whenever there is any criticism directed at the PPP, you PPP valas provide a crash course on the importance of sticking to the process and in this way, confuse the issue at hand by getting off into this tangent. You are right that Zardari is not the only one involved in corruption, but you could have left it at that instead of trying to prove that he is not guilty. There is no point in saying that he could not be convicted even after 9 years of persecution. There was a swiss ruling against him, and Zardari could not get the swiss case off his back untill the NRO came to his rescue. For several years, the PPP strongly denied that Zardari owned the surrey palace, only for them to admit it later: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/aug/21/pakistan.benazirbhutto So lets stop hiding behind the lame defense that no charges against them could be proved. As for the many other people who have not faced any accountability whatsoever, the answer is to make institutions like the judiciary and NAB strong and independent and work for accountability instead of refusing to restore the judiciary, hiding behind the NRO, finishing off the NAB, and having clowns like Fauzia Wahab regularly give ridiculous arguments against the need for a strong accountability system in order to protect the likes of Zardari. Lastly, people shouldn't be asked to mute their criticism and silently wait for the next elections. Criticism is a part of democracy and PPP and its supporters should learn to live with it. Democracy is called a process for a reason; it involves constantly keeping an eye on the govt and judging its performance. @meengla and eidee man:

Regardless of what we think and which possibilities we consider inconceivable or ‘petty minded,’ any investigation that does not include fully probing people like Musharraf, Zardari and Rehman Malik will lack credibility for obvious reasons. Let me just leave it at that.

Response to Meengla’s other points:

It’s a gross oversimplification of the entire debate to divide everything into two extremes. That either one is in favour of the political process or against it. And that if one favours the political process, then one should be sympathetic to the PPP. Whenever there is any criticism directed at the PPP, you PPP valas provide a crash course on the importance of sticking to the process and in this way, confuse the issue at hand by getting off into this tangent.

You are right that Zardari is not the only one involved in corruption, but you could have left it at that instead of trying to prove that he is not guilty. There is no point in saying that he could not be convicted even after 9 years of persecution. There was a swiss ruling against him, and Zardari could not get the swiss case off his back untill the NRO came to his rescue. For several years, the PPP strongly denied that Zardari owned the surrey palace, only for them to admit it later:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/aug/21/pakistan. benazirbhutto
So lets stop hiding behind the lame defense that no charges against them could be proved.

As for the many other people who have not faced any accountability whatsoever, the answer is to make institutions like the judiciary and NAB strong and independent and work for accountability instead of refusing to restore the judiciary, hiding behind the NRO, finishing off the NAB, and having clowns like Fauzia Wahab regularly give ridiculous arguments against the need for a strong accountability system in order to protect the likes of Zardari.

Lastly, people shouldn’t be asked to mute their criticism and silently wait for the next elections. Criticism is a part of democracy and PPP and its supporters should learn to live with it. Democracy is called a process for a reason; it involves constantly keeping an eye on the govt and judging its performance.

]]>