I got censored by Dawn newspaper

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

I read this report about Sheikh Rashid and his elections in pindi and I posted a response to dawn newspaper. It got censored. So, here it is. Tell me what you people think.



MastanKhan @ San Francisco says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
February 25, 2010 at 22:40
Hi,
The most important thing that most of the pakistanis are clueless is about—how is it possible for one man ” Javed Hashmi ” to run for elections in more than one place at the same time for a similiar seat. That is totally ridiculous. That is indeed a slap on the face of democracy itself. It is a shame to call these elections democratic when anyone with support and money and due to his party position can run for election on multiple seats at the same time.

Basically these elections are fraud—heads I win, tails you loose. What kind of game is this. If Javed hashmi decided to forefeit his seat, that seat should have automatically gone to the runner up. Then in the second election, when the winner was declared incompetent, by default, this election should have been given to the runner up. There has to be a limit to being castigated.

All you great souls decry of dictatorship all the time, but none of you have the intellect to look at this most deceptive practise being performed right in front of your faces by these politicians.
As there is one man one vote, so one man can only seek election from one location and that location must be the declared residence for the last one year minimum and also showed as the primary place of residence in the tax returns.

All other talk of democracy by you people is a farce. Where is the loyalty of the politician when he can run for election in three different places—isn’t that the height of arrogance—isn’t it the extreme of arrogance—maybe next time the chairperson of the primary party can run for all the seats in the parliament and defeat all his opponents.
You people can cry all about democracy—you will never get it—because you have a bad foundation. Unless you don’t fix this issue in your election, you will never be able to hold the elected members accountable.

It is just like there are three different boxing matches going on and you sent in Mohammad Ali to everyone of them at the same time. It is a travesty.

Or maybe indian airforce has three strike missions going on over three air bases and you send M M ALAM to take them out all at the same time.

 

[Spring Onion]

I think it happend to you for the first time whereas i have experienced it everytime.

BTW Dawn print paper is different than their e-paper or website with dot com.

They have their fixed agenda. Try to post something condemning that man farid parachs' writings and you wont see your comments posted or try to post criticising Indians lolzz you will get the same response

 

[qsaark]

I think it happend to you for the first time whereas i have experienced it everytime.

BTW Dawn print paper is different than their e-paper or website with dot com.

They have their fixed agenda. Try to post something condemning that man farid parachs' writings and you wont see your comments posted or try to post criticising Indians lolzz you will get the same response

I believe 'Dawn' is not alone in this; I have experienced similar things while posting comments on BBC and CNN websites. All of them have their fixed agendas and usually wont entertain too much deviation from that.

 

[Luftwaffe]

MastanKhan i got censored by Dunya News...So much for the Free Air News and freedom..when these channels want they talk about a subject other than that their eyes and ears are shut..useless next time i intend to post such news to foreign papers/News.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

I just brought this out the first time. I have been censored many atimes. But this subject is the closest to my heart. It is like the building block of a democracy. It is like the first step of an infant towards indepence.

I bbelive and most of you will agree that it is the most important part of any electoral process. One person---one vote---one place to seek elections.

I would love to see the members discuss this issue with their family members---their fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters any and all. I would like to see what you make out of it. what kind of reaction that you get from your elders and colleagues.

I donot know Sheikh Rashid from Adam---nor do I know Jaed Hashmi---. This is an extremely sore subject that pains me a lot. Regardless of who Sheikh Rashid is, he has been wronged by an extremely deceptive electoral system. And not only Sh Rashid---there are incidences that many other prominent politicians have played the same game for running for elections from multiple seats..

There has to be found a way to stop this practise.

 

[qsaark]

The most important thing that most of the pakistanis are clueless is about—

There is no need to insult Pakistanis more than what they deserve. They are not as clueless as you think they are; they have a better appreciation of the good or bad situation of Pakistan than most of us who are staying abroad and hardly do more than criticizing everything about our country only because once we were born there.

how is it possible for one man ” Javed Hashmi ” to run for elections in more than one place at the same time for a similiar seat. That is totally ridiculous. That is indeed a slap on the face of democracy itself. It is a shame to call these elections democratic when anyone with support and money and due to his party position can run for election on multiple seats at the same time.

Because the constitution of 1973 lets them do this; you have problem with allowance given by the constitution, file a petition in the Supreme Court.

Basically these elections are fraud—heads I win, tails you loose. What kind of game is this.

You don’t like this game, don’t participate in this game; no one is forcing you to do so.

If Javed hashmi decided to forefeit his seat, that seat should have automatically gone to the runner up. Then in the second election, when the winner was declared incompetent, by default, this election should have been given to the runner up. There has to be a limit to being castigated.

No, the seat should not have gone to the runner up. People cast their votes based on the party affiliation every where in the world. The runner-up is a runner-up because fewer voters expressed their confidence in him and his party policies in that particular election. I would argue that if the seat is vacated, it should actually be on the discretion of the winner to whom he wants to give that seat. The voters have already expressed their confidence in that person, hence his choice would be the choice of his voters.

All you great souls decry of dictatorship all the time, but none of you have the intellect to look at this most deceptive practise being performed right in front of your faces by these politicians.

I think one of the reason your response did not find its way in the ‘Dawn’ opinion is because of the insulting tone you have used throughout. None of the Pakistanis have intellect…none of them? And you have intellectt who is a hardcore supporter of dictatorships? People may not have intellect as per your allegation, but your beloved dictators didn't have either. When Musharraf had all the support of a rubber stamp parliament of 2002 and bought out/oppressed Justices, why he did not introduce suitable clauses in the constitution that would abort this practice? Instead, his entire focus was on acquiring ultimate powers and amnesty for his illegal and unconstitutional actions through the 17th amendment. Why Zia did not do this? Because like Musharraf, his entire interest was also in remaining the most powerful and above-the-law dictator.

As there is one man one vote, so one man can only seek election from one location and that location must be the declared residence for the last one year minimum and also showed as the primary place of residence in the tax returns.

Again, file a petition in the Supreme court and give your arguments there.

All other talk of democracy by you people is a farce. Where is the loyalty of the politician when he can run for election in three different places—isn’t that the height of arrogance—isn’t it the extreme of arrogance—maybe next time the chairperson of the primary party can run for all the seats in the parliament and defeat all his opponents.
You people can cry all about democracy—you will never get it—because you have a bad foundation. Unless you don’t fix this issue in your election, you will never be able to hold the elected members accountable.

Instead of lecturing, I’ll respectfully suggest you to leave the comfort of your US home, come back to Pakistan and fight a legal battle for the cause you think is correct. You are talking as if this practice is aborted, Pakistani politics will be kosher once for all.

I donot know Sheikh Rashid from Adam---nor do I know Jaed Hashmi---. This is an extremely sore subject that pains me a lot. Regardless of who Sheikh Rashid is, he has been wronged by an extremely deceptive electoral system. And not only Sh Rashid---there are incidences that many other prominent politicians have played the same game for running for elections from multiple seats..

Yes, Sheikh Rashid had to bite the dust against Javeid Hashmi, but what happened next? Sheikh Rashid may have been wronged by an extremely deceptive electoral system (as per your understanding) earlier but did he not get a fair chance next time? The seat was up for grab once more and he bit the dust once again; hello???? What this tells? That the voters did not have confidence in SR hence he had lost in 2008 and for the same reason he lost in 2010. I do not see a lot wrong with this practice of contesting from more than one constituency; Our democracy (or whatever it is) and our country has more important issues than this one.

Lastly, why so much concern over Javeid Hashmi’s contest from more than one constituency? What about Sheik Saheb himself? He contested on two seats, NA-55 against Javed Hashmi and NA-56 against Hanif Abbasi…What about Chaudhry Shujaat? He contested on NA-105 as well as on NA-112…What about Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi? He contested on NA-58, NA-61, and NA-187…What about Chaudhry Moonis Elahi? He contested on PP-152 as well as PP-110… now their opponents were not wronged by an extremely deceptive electoral system? Kyon, wahad mazloom Sheeda si?

 

[third eye]

Hi,

I read this report about Sheikh Rashid and his elections in pindi and I posted a response to dawn newspaper. It got censored. So, here it is. Tell me what you people think.



MastanKhan @ San Francisco says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
February 25, 2010 at 22:40
Hi,
The most important thing that most of the pakistanis are clueless is about—how is it possible for one man ” Javed Hashmi ” to run for elections in more than one place at the same time for a similiar seat. That is totally ridiculous. That is indeed a slap on the face of democracy itself. It is a shame to call these elections democratic when anyone with support and money and due to his party position can run for election on multiple seats at the same time.

Basically these elections are fraud—heads I win, tails you loose. What kind of game is this. If Javed hashmi decided to forefeit his seat, that seat should have automatically gone to the runner up. Then in the second election, when the winner was declared incompetent, by default, this election should have been given to the runner up. There has to be a limit to being castigated.

All you great souls decry of dictatorship all the time, but none of you have the intellect to look at this most deceptive practise being performed right in front of your faces by these politicians.
As there is one man one vote, so one man can only seek election from one location and that location must be the declared residence for the last one year minimum and also showed as the primary place of residence in the tax returns.

All other talk of democracy by you people is a farce. Where is the loyalty of the politician when he can run for election in three different places—isn’t that the height of arrogance—isn’t it the extreme of arrogance—maybe next time the chairperson of the primary party can run for all the seats in the parliament and defeat all his opponents.
You people can cry all about democracy—you will never get it—because you have a bad foundation. Unless you don’t fix this issue in your election, you will never be able to hold the elected members accountable.

It is just like there are three different boxing matches going on and you sent in Mohammad Ali to everyone of them at the same time. It is a travesty.

Or maybe indian airforce has three strike missions going on over three air bases and you send M M ALAM to take them out all at the same time.

MK,

A lot of ppl have thanked you for post #1.

I feel the thought behind what was written in the post is right . However, the tone, verbiage & tenor of the post leave a great deal to be desired.

The post was not meant to be printed in a college magazine. National dailies normally do not print such posts & would edit them if they did.

My two pennies worth since an opinion was sought.

 

[Luftwaffe]

so should we get our own website to post it?

 

[graphican]

Mastan Khan, Sir you are probably looking into this aspect at this election only. It has been happening and not just for PML(N), every party you can name in Pakistan does that.

When elections are held on party basis and not individual basis, a seat that a party leaves out does not becomes seat of the runner up party. Think in a different perspective that what if the winner of a seat passes away... If we follow your suggested approach, the seat should go to the runner up who is still alive and has second level of popularity in his constituency. Do you think doing so would be just and fair?

Complexity doesn't stop here. If we start leaving the concept of party out and focus on winning and runner up individuals, who do you think would make Government? After reaching the parliament, every person would want to join government and the concept of majority party would end up there. Who would run the country then? Who will be in opposition?

In my opinion the best way to resolve the left out seat is to conduct second election and let people decide who they want to vote yet again. It is not unfair as people would decide the second time and verdict of people is the final and ultimate objective of whole democratic process.

 

[MastanKhan]

Qsaark,

I told you one time---don't ride piggy back on my post---if you have substance---then post your own thoughts. Conquer your own mountains.

Niether is Sh Rashid anyone near to me nor is Javed Hashmi---their names were used as an example.

You are taking this discussion a little too personal and making it too personal.

Have you developed any problems about discussing any issues on this board---people should stop talking if they don't like something.

Bringing in Musharraf was extremely pitiful and in poor tatste on your part Q.

 

[Gin ka Pakistan]

I tried just once long time ago and after being censored never again , They are more concerned about their Indian readers and pro left.

 

[Creder]

Hi,

I read this report about Sheikh Rashid and his elections in pindi and I posted a response to dawn newspaper. It got censored. So, here it is. Tell me what you people think.



MastanKhan @ San Francisco says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
February 25, 2010 at 22:40
Hi,
The most important thing that most of the pakistanis are clueless is about—how is it possible for one man ” Javed Hashmi ” to run for elections in more than one place at the same time for a similiar seat. That is totally ridiculous. That is indeed a slap on the face of democracy itself. It is a shame to call these elections democratic when anyone with support and money and due to his party position can run for election on multiple seats at the same time.

Basically these elections are fraud—heads I win, tails you loose. What kind of game is this. If Javed hashmi decided to forefeit his seat, that seat should have automatically gone to the runner up. Then in the second election, when the winner was declared incompetent, by default, this election should have been given to the runner up. There has to be a limit to being castigated.

All you great souls decry of dictatorship all the time, but none of you have the intellect to look at this most deceptive practise being performed right in front of your faces by these politicians.
As there is one man one vote, so one man can only seek election from one location and that location must be the declared residence for the last one year minimum and also showed as the primary place of residence in the tax returns.

All other talk of democracy by you people is a farce. Where is the loyalty of the politician when he can run for election in three different places—isn’t that the height of arrogance—isn’t it the extreme of arrogance—maybe next time the chairperson of the primary party can run for all the seats in the parliament and defeat all his opponents.
You people can cry all about democracy—you will never get it—because you have a bad foundation. Unless you don’t fix this issue in your election, you will never be able to hold the elected members accountable.

It is just like there are three different boxing matches going on and you sent in Mohammad Ali to everyone of them at the same time. It is a travesty.

Or maybe indian airforce has three strike missions going on over three air bases and you send M M ALAM to take them out all at the same time.

this is our messed up system mate but you can't let it bottle you down make a blog post this somewhere, only through consistent dertimination do we stand a chance against this system

 

[MastanKhan]

Mastan Khan, Sir you are probably looking into this aspect at this election only. It has been happening and not just for PML(N), every party you can name in Pakistan does that.

When elections are held on party basis and not individual basis, a seat that a party leaves out does not becomes seat of the runner up party. Think in a different perspective that what if the winner of a seat passes away... If we follow your suggested approach, the seat should go to the runner up who is still alive and has second level of popularity in his constituency. Do you think doing so would be just and fair?

Complexity doesn't stop here. If we start leaving the concept of party out and focus on winning and runner up individuals, who do you think would make Government? After reaching the parliament, every person would want to join government and the concept of majority party would end up there. Who would run the country then? Who will be in opposition?

In my opinion the best way to resolve the left out seat is to conduct second election and let people decide who they want to vote yet again. It is not unfair as people would decide the second time and verdict of people is the final and ultimate objective of whole democratic process.

Sir,

Mr Hashmi was just used as an example. A deceased member has nothing to do with what I am saying---. In the U S of A the deceased members widow is requested to complete the term. That is another issue.

Without taking it personal you have to look at it in an impersonal manner---can you send MM Alam to ten different intercept missions at the same time---. Or can Mohammad Ali fight all the challengers at the same time. Is Tendulkar going to bat at all the ten positions at the same time in one game and maybe Sehwag do it for them in another game.

You see we talk about world standards of democracy---we talk about one man one vote---but then right from gitgo---right at the basic foundation level we take liberties and and begin to be deceptive to democracy. Why---because if it is a part of the 1973 constitution---then the people who made this constitution---were not going to accept their losses laying down---so in their infite web of treachery they came up with this plan---and my wonderful countrymen are clueless to the deception enforced upon them.

And when I try to bring up this issue just for discussion on this board---my colleague Qsaark takes it upon himself to lambast me as a person. This issue is not about me---it is about pakistan and all the pakistanis---that is why I stated---talk amongst your peers---talk to your family members and see what they think.

How do you think that democracy can succeed when when the politician has no loyalty to the electorate.

All election in any country are held on the basis of political party affiliations---independants are there but are an exception.

Now accordingly to you---for the left out seat another election should be held---that is totatlly pitiful---why should there be a left out seat---if the participant didnot have any wish to occupy that seat---then why would he run for elections from that seat.

There is absolutely no reason why a party would vacate a seat won in election. The party is not monarchy and the lection is not being held in someone's fiefdom---it is a slap on the face of the electorate, the democracy and the nation in itseld.

 

[MastanKhan]

MK,

A lot of ppl have thanked you for post #1.

I feel the thought behind what was written in the post is right . However, the tone, verbiage & tenor of the post leave a great deal to be desired.

The post was not meant to be printed in a college magazine. National dailies normally do not print such posts & would edit them if they did.

My two pennies worth since an opinion was sought.

Hi,

Forget about the tone for once---discuss about the merits and demerits of the system if you want to participate.

The national dailys do post a lot of stuff that should not have been posted------.

And boy---look at the happy face of Qssark---boy---Q---ain't you something else.

The people who thanked me, saw my pain and suffering and just not the words as you did. They felt what I have felt for so long---they wanted to say the same what I had put in words. These people have grown up with me over the time we have been together on this board---sometimes they voice what I want to say---sometimes I take the honour---but we all are very compassionate about how we feel about our motherland and wish that things were onthe up and up.

 

[Fighter488]

Dear Mastan

Here in India, some time back it was the norm that politician used to represent
multiple constituencies. But lately Election Commission has made it mandatory for every one to represent at one constituency. One can run for an election at multiple places, but after the results are declared, one has to choose ONLY ONE constituency to represent, and resign/leave the other seats, if he/she is elected at more than one place. A re-election is done on left constituencies.

This is very logical and now politicians take great care in chosing thier constituency. This make the election process more competitive, fair and democratic in practice.

As you pointed out, I fully agree on this point. Here Indian EC has done a commendable job indeed. Pakistan's Election Commission must follow a simmilar approach. My advice is to forward your concerns to the EC in Pakistan. Hope some sane mentality prevail there.

Fighter