Musharraf's "Second Coup" In Pakistan

Leader Invokes Lincoln In Announcing State Of Emergency; Bhutto Warns Of Civil War

(CBS/AP)  "Pakistan may well have been pushed into a blind alley and its capacity to come out unscathed is seriously in doubt," said a commentary in Sunday's Dawn daily written by noted human rights lawyer I. A. Rehman, 77. Rehman was detained by police later in the day.

Musharraf was due to hang up his military uniform this month and usher in a long-promised era of democracy. But, fearful that a defiant Supreme Court would spoil his plans to rule five more years as a civilian, he has resorted to dictatorial measures.

With authorities blocking independent TV networks, it was left to Pakistan's press to deliver a blistering indictment of Saturday's declaration of emergency, which many equated with martial law because it left the army chief effectively unchecked.

Musharraf sacked the Supreme Court's top judge and authorities quickly rounded up hundreds of the general's political rivals, lawyers, and even raided the independent Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, where Rehman was picked up with more than 30 others.

Dubbing it "Gen. Musharraf's second coup," Dawn juxtaposed pictures of the U.S.-allied leader in his fatigues when he ousted an elected government in 1999 with images of him declaring the emergency on TV in civilian clothes on Saturday, just a little grayer around the temples.

Musharraf justified the move on the grounds that Islamic militancy had become a grave threat to Pakistan. Indeed, jihadists have seize control of swaths of northwestern Pakistan and launched dozens of deadly suicide attacks, mostly against security forces. Hundreds have died in the violence this year.

But much of the page-long emergency declaration focuses on the activism of the Supreme Court. It was accused of working at "cross purposes" with the executive and undermining its efforts to fight extremism, pushing for the release of dozens of Pakistani terror suspects held secretly by intelligence agencies.

Tellingly, Musharraf chose to act as the court was about to decide whether to validate his controversial Oct. 6 election victory - a win that opponents decried as unconstitutional. A close aide to Musharraf told The Associated Press that they had expected the judges to rule against him. The aide spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

Commentator Shafqat Mahmood said the perception that the emergency had been declared to prolong his personal power would further sully the profile of the military leader, whose popularity has sunk since his botched attempt to fire the independent-minded chief justice in March - a mission finally accomplished Saturday.

"For the last six months, Musharraf has been a very hated figure in the country. Now he has pariah status. It is so obvious to the people that there is no principal involved here," Mahmood said.

Joseph Biden, chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, urged the Bush administration "to move from a Musharraf policy to a Pakistan policy."

"President Bush should personally make clear to Gen. Musharraf the risks to U.S.-Pakistani relations if he does not restore the constitution, permit free and fair elections and take off his uniform as promised," Biden said in a statement.

Yet it remained doubtful that the U.S. and other Western nations - which last week urged Musharraf to avoid authoritarian measures - would abandon the urbane general who made Pakistan a valued ally in the fight against al Qaeda and Taliban after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

The Bush administration said it was deeply disturbed by the emergency and urged a swift return to democracy. But the Pentagon said Musharraf's declaration does not affect U.S. military support of Pakistan, suggesting to many here it will be business as usual.

Washington has provided billions of dollars in military and economic assistance since it suspended sanctions on military aid to Islamabad after 9/11.

"Those people who claim to be champions of democracy appear ready to let this go as they think he's the only one who can deliver in the war on terror," Mahmood said.

But further alienating Pakistanis already deeply resentful of the high-handed attitude of their rulers and a war on militants seen as fought at the behest of the Americans will make that job harder, and militants could exploit the political crisis to sow more discontent.

"We should also expect a surge in terrorist activities and bomb blasts by Taliban and al Qaeda elements to take advantage of the situation," the editor of the liberal Daily Times newspaper, Najam Sethi, wrote.

Musharraf, who has been targeted at least three times by militant assassins, may also face growing unease in the ranks of an army - the main source of his power - whose own standing is tarnished along with that of its chief.

"The army is fighting on two fronts: the war against terrorism, which it is struggling with, and a losing battle for its own image," said analyst Ikram Sehgal. "The only way Musharraf is going to redeem himself, especially with the Pakistan army, is that having got the Supreme Court out of the way, he must take off his uniform then announce in the near future free and fair elections."

A parliamentary vote is due in January but that schedule was in doubt, although Musharraf said Saturday he was still committed to a full transition to democracy. Deputy Information Minister Tariq Azim conceded Sunday that, for the moment, the elections were on the "backburner."

Elections or not, the most dogged opponents of military rule see only one solution.

"We believe that Musharraf has to be taken out of the equation and a government of national reconciliation put in place," Asma Jehangir, another prominent rights activist, wrote by e-mail from house arrest in Lahore.

"It must be backed by the military. Short of this there are no realistic solutions."

Streets in the capital appeared calm, with only a handful of demonstrations. But one, attended by 40 people at the Marriott Hotel, was broken up by baton-wielding police.

Lawyers may strike tomorrow, and with tension growing it is not clear how this will unfold.

[forthepeopl1]

United States May Declare State of Emergency


Associated Press Writer
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) %u2013 The whitehouse government of embattled President bush said Thursday it may impose a state of emergency due to ``external and internal threats'''''''''''''''' and deteriorating law and order.
including from Democratic presidential hopeful Barak Obama, over the possibility of U.S. military action against al-Qaida in Pakistan ``has started alarm bells ringing and has upset the Pakistani public.''''''''''''''''
But it appeared the motivation for a declaration of an emergency would be the domestic political woes of
President bush
During a state of emergency, the government can restrict the freedom to move, rally, engage in political activities or form groups and impose other limits such as restricting congress right to make laws or even dissolving congress
``These are only unconfirmed reports although the possibility of imposition of emergency cannot be ruled out and has recently been talked about and discussed, keeping in mind some external and internal threats and the law and order situation,bush told The Associated Press.

In Washington, the State Department said . ``
Bush is under growing American pressure to crack down on militants at the Afghan border because of fears that al-Qaida is regrouping there.
The Bush administration has also not ruled out unilateral military action inside america but like Obama, has stressed the need to work with the americans.

[tbweb]

brianbwb,

If Musharraf ran a clean government? What nation runs a clean government that somebody somewhere thinks is not clean? Only the U.S. runs a clean government, we can''t expert other nations to be perfect like US! :)

[brianbwb-2009]

"If Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda and Islamic Extremist were not running loose and operating terrorist activities inside Pakistan then there would be a case for Bhutto!" Posted by tbweb

If we accept the premise that all of Bush''s boogiemen are "running around" Pakistan, then is this not a case against Musharraf, after all who is supposed to be on watch there, and has been for a number of years?

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by tbweb

Obvoiusly the people never considered the original coup "erased". One must ask, when a military ruler runs a corrupt government, is it any surprise he would win an election? After all, Al Gore won in the US, but we got Bush, proof that corruption produces whatever result the controller wants.

If Musharraf ran a clean government, and took care of all his people, and not just his cronies, he wouldn''t have to coup again (recoup?) to keep power.

I have said this when witnessing the fall of governments, if they were good, the people would not let them fall, if they are bad the people will sooner or later make them fall.

[tbweb]

Posted by brianbwb at 06:31 AM : Nov 05, 2007,,,

The original Coup by Musharraf was erased when he won the next election fair and square! The Pakistans President removed Musharraf when he was out of the country and nobody liked that cowardly act! If Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda and Islamic Extremist were not running loose and operating terrorist activities inside Pakistan then there would be a case for Bhutto! Pakistan is on fire and no one conducts normal activities during a fire, only once the fire is put out!

[brianbwb-2009]

Don''t forget, web, that the assassination attempt on Benazir if successful, would benefit Pervie, and his partners in the US, but not Al Qaeda, because AQ would be murdering the "daughter of Pakistan''s George Washington", one of the most popular figures in the country (or outside while in exile) so it doesn''t make any sense that AL Q. would be behind the attempt.

Any investigation by competent people would probably trace the attempt back to Pervie and friends, so lets declare martial law, suspend the constitution, and keep anything like that from happening.

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by tbweb

The problem many have with military in power is that in countries like Pakistan, and until recently Indonesia, the military was permitted to raise operating funds from the people, a power which, after the nation was well established, morphed into a mafia style collection racket, where property, cash, jewelery and all things material become fair game to a covetous eye, especially with no higher authority to which that eye must answer.

As for Benazir, let us not forget she was exiled after Pervie Musharraf took power in a coup. In a fair election, she would have beaten Musharraf hands down, but she was in exile, and not allowed to contest. Even Imran Khan would beat Pervie soundly, so Perv does this because he knows that in an election, he is running a distant third, and numbers two and one are from the same opposition party.

[jjp735i]

Musharraf has done what Bush would like to do in the U.S., take full control and *** everyone else. I am surprised Bush has not used these measures in order to combat rising extremism in the Republican party. Congress would not stand up to him that''s for sure.

Why is Bush not attacking Musharraf? Musharraf is doing what any other dictator does. Takes full control.

[tbweb]

Posted by brianbwb at 05:26 AM : Nov 05, 2007,,,

I don''t understand Pakistan''s obsession with President Musharraf being in charge of the military, most Presidents are in charge of their military including in the U.S.! In fact Pres. Musharraf is probably the best person to run Pakistan''s military, thats what he does best! In the recent Pakistan Presidential elections Benazir Bhutto should have entered the race and ran against Pervez Musharraf but she did not and Musharraf won a new 5 year term fair and square! Now Benazir Bhutto wants to reenter Pakistan and expect to share power with Musharraf having won nothing! What kind of democratic process is that? There is even talk of holding new elections but the elections are over, Benazir missed them, she can run against Musharraf in 5 years when new elections are held. I don''t like the recent action Pres. Musharraf has taken but he must have had a good reason and I think its because Pakistans major cities are under attack when in the past terrorist restricted attacks to Tribal areas, the attack on Pakistan''s largest cities is new! In addition over 150 people were killed trying to assassinate Benazir! As long as Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda and terrorist are running loose in Pakistan causing mayhem, there can be no business as usual anyway, extremist activities require extreme measures!

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by tbweb

Benazir wasn''t so bad, her problem was the blatant corruption of her husband, I do believe she has learned her lesson from that, and not let her husband be so conspicuous in his corruption that even the uneducated poor people see through it.

Pakistan''s problem is that Musharraf immediately stepped it up, colluding with the US, and European countries to sell Pakistan''s resources, and rent the land to foreigners, regardless of the fact that the government didn''t own the land it was renting. They also took kickbacks to let multinationals enslave their workers, and the anger has built to the point where the people say that Benazir was better than now.

This is an internal problem, it must be solved internally, US interference will make it much worse.

[tbweb]

The best thing about the future is that it comes one day at a time.

-Abraham Lincoln

[tbweb]

Posted by NHProphet at 04:24 AM : Nov 05, 2007,,,

SlipSter01 Posted:

Ron Paul voted against the Do-Not-Call Registry
Ron Paul voted against extending Unemployment Compensation Act
Ron Paul voted against the Supplemental Appropriations Act for Further Recovery From and Response to Terrorist Attacks
Ron Paul voted against stricter penalties for sexual predators
Ron Paul voted aginst the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act
Ron Paul voted against the Child Custody Protection Act
Ron Paul voted against the Internet Freedom and Broadband Deployment Act
Ron Paul refused to recognize A Resolution Honoring the Contributions of Catholic Schools
Ron Paul regularly votes against funding the military (year after year)
Ron Paul voted against the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Response Act
Ron Paul voted against Expressing Solidarity With Israel in the Fight Against Terrorism
Ron Paul voted against the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act
Ron Paul was the only vote against the Federal Long-Term Care Insurance Amendments Act
Ron Paul was the only vote against the Financial Anti-Terrorism Act
Ron Paul voted against deterring and punishing terrorist acts in the United States and around the world
Ron Paul voted against Urging the Secretary of Energy to Fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve
Ron Paul was the only vote against the Military Construction Appropriations
Ron Paul was the only vote against the resolution To Promote Freedom and Democracy in Viet Nam

[nhprophet]

What we need is a President who will show us the way. Not the old way. Not the same way, but a NEW WAY. Think about this for a minute. What if we pulled all of our troops out of South Korea? They''ve been there for 50+ years. What if we quit worrying about Iran, but instead, realized that its having a nuclear weapon will not mean the end of the world? What if we pulled all of our troops out of the Middle-East, and brought them all home? What if we realistically addressed the National Debt, and paid attention to REALLY DOING SOMETHING about stopping illegal immigration? These are the ideas of Republican Presidential candidate, Dr. Ron Paul. He''s a ten term Congressman and a physician who has delivered over 4,000 babies. He''s an intellectual who''s published four books, three of which are devoted entirely to sound economics and one to foreign policy. He was raised on a dairy farm in Pennsylvania as a pious Lutheran, but now he attends a Baptist church. Paul is given to mulling things over morally. Whenever he recollects the helicopter pilots he treated as an Air Force Flight Surgeon (Captain) during the Vietnam War, a war which he now says was "totally unnecessary and illegal," he laments, "They were gung-ho. I''ve often thought about how many of those people never came back." Candidates with the high level of personal integrity and proven track record of adherance to The Constitution, Congressman Paul has always demonstrated only come around once in a lifetime, if we''re lucky.

[tbweb]

Who the hell thinks that Pakistan is a "normal" country? Pakistan is and has been completely out of control.

Posted by george2221 at 11:58 PM : Nov 04, 2007,,,

You haven''t seen "out of control!", let something bad happen to Musharraf! Like Saddam before him the World will be wishing Musharraf never left! Musharraf is Pakistans glue and the Devil we know! Democracy is not for every nation and the U.S. only seems to want Democracy for a nation when it favors the U.S. anyway. Take Lebanon for example, when the wrong Party won, suddenly the U.S. didn''t like Democracy for Lebanon! Musharraf is still the lesser evil, the best choice in a sea of bad ones.

[brianbwb-2009]

"If all gods are loving and peaceful, longing only to end the suffering and death of children, shouldn''''t we assist them?"
SearingTruth

And if the opposite is true, shouldn''t we then resist them?

[searingtruth]

"Searing Truth: As always on point, people become complacent , little by little freedoms are taken away in whatever guise. Be it for National Security, Homeland Security, basic truths we hold true, are no longer ours, and once given up, will never return."
Edward1975


Indeed fellow patriot. But our battle is not yet lost, only in great danger of defeat.

I do not wish to instigate or infer pessimism for our American cause, but only to communicate the dire peril within which it resides.

I know that, with patriots such as yourself and millions of others, at least over 70% of our population, we will ultimately prevail. But at the cost of untold numbers of lives, and indescribable suffering.

It would be so much easier if the Democrats, and the few loyal Republican politicians left, would simply stand up and fulfill their one most sacred obligation, to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, instead of continuing to subvert it.
ST


"If all gods are loving and peaceful, longing only to end the suffering and death of children, shouldn''t we assist them?"
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave - www.searingtruth.com

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by jowand

My last post was directed at your comment. you put the wrong two together, so the result is not four, because your logic is flawed. It seems that you, like Bush sees anyone who disagrees with your flawed political view as Al Qaeda.

[brianbwb-2009]

Musharrafs opposition is AL Quaeda and Islamist friends, plus US Liberals and European Socialists.

Wrong, the opposition is led by Benazir Bhutto, the leader Musharraf ousted in his first coup. Another important opposition is name is Imran Khan, of the legendary Khan family, all international sports champions and national heroes. Both are the last people the religious zealots want to see in power.

Reza Pahlavi, the "shah" of Iran, was put into power because of a US backed coup, his opposition were the people of Iran. The galvanization of public action behind a religious figure is the response to US interference, a response that you seem to think they have no right to.

Your statements above not only illustrate that you have no knowledge of the subject, but are also willing to see people killed and otherwise harmed because of your incorrect statements.

[edward1975-2009]

Searing Truth: As always on point, people become complacent , little by little freedoms are taken away in whatever guise. Be it for National Security, Homeland Security, basic truths we hold true, are no longer ours, and once given up, will never return.

[smirk5]

Cons like to say that Iran is our chief threat right now. But, Pakistan, which has actual al-qaeda terrorist training camps and nukes, somehow falls back on the list of threats behind Iran. That''s why Cons can''t be taken seriously when it comes to foreign policy.