Nawaz Sharif's scam in UK

[fatman17]

no one will catch these guys as simple as that! they belong to the same tub (aik he hamam kay hain)

 

[qsaark]

The Independent stands by its story and they are more reliable then Ansar Abbasi

How do you know that Ansar Abbasi is any less reliable? Do you have any proof to support your claim? And if he is any less reliable, why he was not dragged into the courts for slander charges? Problem with you is (please don’t take it personal), you are posting all these things simply in support of a person, Musharraf. We on the other hand are defending a system, Democracy.

Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it. You can not defend Musharraf based on the argument that NS and BB were wrong too. Indeed, NS and BB were wrong on several issues, but if the person who replaced them in the name of "Good governance" also starts making the similar mistakes, than the whole exercise become pointless.

 

[Bane Blade]

NS sold sovereignty of our country to India, when he with drew forces from kargil, and u will say that Musharraf was guilty in kargil issue, so also tell me why NS banned the Musharraf's plane from landing in any airport of pakistan.

Because he wanted to remove the Chief of army Staff and avoid all the damage that happened by the military coup, by the way Musharraf withdrew forces from India and he initially ventured into this war.

Oh please! cry me a river ... NS is responsible for the withdrawl from Kargil ...

Musharraf's taped conversation clearly shows that he was against any concessions but Nawaz Sharif beeged Clinton on a 4th of July Holiday and sold the sovereignty of this country.

I am sure that Musharraf would want to press on though I must point out that we never needed to fight in the first place and hence we needed to not only stop the war but also make sure their was no retaliation at the moment no better office than US presidents was capable of that. I also forgot that NS was COAS or maybe he wasn't?

Here is the link:

Pakistan PM `made millions in UK' - News - The Independent

I had already added it sir.

Friends is there a time limit as per the Pakistani Law in which the case has to be tried.
Obviously you cannot try a case decades after the crime was committed, but what is the time stipulation as per the local law.

I am sure their is though Nawaz Should certainly be tried if he has commited such actions, as for his case it was dropped as mentioned and by the way incase you are wondering about all the info Rehman Malik came up with are you forgetting who was help him plot all this and eventually as to his role today all this growth doesn't it indicate anything.

 

[SSGPA1]

How do you know that Ansar Abbasi is any less reliable? Do you have any proof to support your claim? And if he is any less reliable, why he was not dragged into the courts for slander charges? Problem with you is (please don’t take it personal), you are posting all these things simply in support of a person, Musharraf. We on the other hand are defending a system, Democracy.

No I don't have any evidence but I have logic to support .. CJP's son was investigated by Ansar Abbasi but he didn't publish the report because he was advised by some secret agency to wait ... AA waits and then issues the report ... then he backs off from his own report .... on one hand he is investigatingDr. Arsalan and on the other hand he is writing against the govt.

Why AA has turned a blind eye to the corruption of NS?? If he was an honest investigator and a true journalist he would have brought reports about farm house in Rai Wand!

Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it. You can not defend Musharraf based on the argument that NS and BB were wrong too. Indeed, NS and BB were wrong on several issues, but if the person who replaced them in the name of "Good governance" also starts making the similar mistakes, than the whole exercise become pointless.

I have said this many a times and I would repeat it again for record ... Musharraf is no saint and he did make mistakes but Clinton made mistakes too ... point is that we as a nation have tried BB and NS both at least twice and have seen the result ... Musharraf is better than both BB and NS.

Hamid Mir once asked a retired CJ (I think Fakharuddin G Ibrahim) that Ch. Iftikhar also took oath on PCO ... Retired CJ smiled and said 'wo sub pehley huwa hai usko choor dain' ... I like this formula and would like to apply for Musharraf instead of BB or NS.

 

[SSGPA1]

I am sure that Musharraf would want to press on though I must point out that we never needed to fight in the first place and hence we needed to not only stop the war but also make sure their was no retaliation at the moment no better office than US presidents was capable of that. I also forgot that NS was COAS or maybe he wasn't?

Line of Control (LOC) is not a permanent border, most of the Pakistanis and Indians don't know that LOC has been changed several times during peace time and it is a common practice so Kargil operation was not an attack on an international border. Rules of engagements plus the position of UN are different when it comes to the disputed territory. Did we need to intrude? That is a whole different debate and I fully support Kargil.

The ISI was then headed by Lieutenant General Ziauddin who was very close to NS. The same officer was appointed to the COAS position by NS. There is no doubt that NS knew about Kargil from the very first day.

Furthermore, according to the Gen. Kiani's interview on Meray Mutabiq "In a meeting on May 17, 1999, Sharif gave a green signal to the operation. He assured conditional support to General Musharraf that the government would back the operation when he successfully moved forward. If unfortunately it failed, he would not be in a position to support him (Musharraf)."

What kind of a leader is NS? Why Kargil operation was not stopped by the PM on May 17th?

This gentleman canèt take pressure and is completely confused.

 

[Bane Blade]

Line of Control (LOC) is not a permanent border, most of the Pakistanis and Indians don't know that LOC has been changed several times during peace time and it is a common practice so Kargil operation was not an attack on an international border. Rules of engagements plus the position of UN are different when it comes to the disputed territory. Did we need to intrude? That is a whole different debate and I fully support Kargil.

The ISI was then headed by Lieutenant General Ziauddin who was very close to NS. The same officer was appointed to the COAS position by NS. There is no doubt that NS knew about Kargil from the very first day.

Furthermore, according to the Gen. Kiani's interview on Meray Mutabiq "In a meeting on May 17, 1999, Sharif gave a green signal to the operation. He assured conditional support to General Musharraf that the government would back the operation when he successfully moved forward. If unfortunately it failed, he would not be in a position to support him (Musharraf)."

What kind of a leader is NS? Why Kargil operation was not stopped by the PM on May 17th?

This gentleman canèt take pressure and is completely confused.

I can support my arguement with logic firstly the man was in India a week before the start of this conflict secondly mate think logically we know it is a line of controll and not a border however this is wholly unfair for either side to come marching through for both sides sake. General's from the days of the conflict have come on record and said NS was not fully and correctly informed. I am sure he can't take pressure no wonder we became a nuclear power during his days

 

[batmannow]

Because he wanted to remove the Chief of army Staff and avoid all the damage that happened by the military coup, by the way Musharraf withdrew forces from India and he initially ventured into this war.



I am sure that Musharraf would want to press on though I must point out that we never needed to fight in the first place and hence we needed to not only stop the war but also make sure their was no retaliation at the moment no better office than US presidents was capable of that. I also forgot that NS was COAS or maybe he wasn't?



I had already added it sir.



I am sure their is though Nawaz Should certainly be tried if he has commited such actions, as for his case it was dropped as mentioned and by the way incase you are wondering about all the info Rehman Malik came up with are you forgetting who was help him plot all this and eventually as to his role today all this growth doesn't it indicate anything.


& i am sure that, he can be cleared off any thing , just like he has been cleared by our very dear "JUSTICE CHOWDRY" it just took a long march?
they will be keep doing that, (inshaallaha)
mr, 10% had also provided the certificate of his madness in some british court, i cant remember the exact case , but NAWAZ can certenly do the same!:

 

[SSGPA1]

I chatted with one of the reporters of this report and he adbvised that this case didn't go anywhere after all.

IMO, Qazi family might have settled out of court.

 

[Bane Blade]

& i am sure that, he can be cleared off any thing , just like he has been cleared by our very dear "JUSTICE CHOWDRY" it just took a long march?
they will be keep doing that, (inshaallaha)
mr, 10% had also provided the certificate of his madness in some british court, i cant remember the exact case , but NAWAZ can certenly do the same!:

If that is the way then let it be but I am telling you no judge can go against the law so he can certainly rule against the evidence whatever the case.