Lahori paa jee
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Messages
- 752
- Reaction score
- 0
Actually there was nothing in that. This is an issue which has been used by PPP to gain political gains
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto responsible for 1971 break-up of Pakistan: Musharraf
- Thread starter Srirangan
- Start date
Actually there was nothing in that. This is an issue which has been used by PPP to gain political gains
Lahori paa jee
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Messages
- 752
- Reaction score
- 0
Musharraf peddling book at state expenses, says Benazir
Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Chairperson Benazir Bhutto on Friday said the recently published book of President Pervez Musharraf is a cheap attempt to gain popularity by endangering the country’s vital national interests.
“It is regrettable that General Musharraf is abusing his official position to boost his personal interests. Millions of rupees from state exchequer are being spent on financing the state visit to the United States, which has virtually become a promotional tour of his book,” she said in her reaction on President Musharraf’s book.
Benazir Bhutto’s reaction to President Musharraf’s memoirs came four days after the release of the book, In the Line of Fire, at a time when most of the politicians have given their detailed reaction.
She said it is unprecedented that a head of state spends three weeks along with an entourage of more than 60 people on a “personal publicity trip”. Benazir said the military ruler must account for the “precious” public money used to finance the book launch.
“It is even more regrettable that the general is diminishing Pakistan in order to peddle his memoirs. By leaking secrets and classified information about issues of national interest, General Musharraf stands accused of violating the Official Secrets Act. No serving Army chief is permitted to speak on these matters. By violating the Official Secrets Act, General Musharraf is jeopardising Pakistan’s national security,” she said.
She said, “General Musharraf’s memoirs are a sad and poignant reminder of the damage that military rule has inflicted on Pakistan. His admission of creating the ruling king’s party, the PML-Q, is an open defiance of the oath he has taken as a military officer and as an Army chief, which prevents him from interfering in political matters.”
Benazir said such gross violation of the Constitution by successive military rulers has endangered the existence of Pakistan and it is ironical to see that Pakistan’s military generals are quick to surrender under foreign pressure, but are defiant in opposing any submission to civilian authorities.
“It is a disgrace to see General Musharraf criticising in his book Pakistan’s first popularly-elected prime minister, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Bhutto is not dependent on memoirs of unpopular military generals, who are unable to win any electoral seat without state patronage. Bhutto, on the other hand, remains the heartbeat of Pakistani people. He restored the respectability of a broken Pakistan and its fallen Army by uniting the country through a constitution and developing nuclear deterrence.”
She said, “Military generals should not forget the services of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who was a proud son of Pakistan, and who gave his life in defending Pakistan’s interests. Instead of blaming Bhutto of Pakistan’s dismemberment, General Musharraf is well advised to focus on the Ayub and Yahya dictatorships that sowed the seeds of division.”
Link
Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Chairperson Benazir Bhutto on Friday said the recently published book of President Pervez Musharraf is a cheap attempt to gain popularity by endangering the country’s vital national interests.
“It is regrettable that General Musharraf is abusing his official position to boost his personal interests. Millions of rupees from state exchequer are being spent on financing the state visit to the United States, which has virtually become a promotional tour of his book,” she said in her reaction on President Musharraf’s book.
Benazir Bhutto’s reaction to President Musharraf’s memoirs came four days after the release of the book, In the Line of Fire, at a time when most of the politicians have given their detailed reaction.
She said it is unprecedented that a head of state spends three weeks along with an entourage of more than 60 people on a “personal publicity trip”. Benazir said the military ruler must account for the “precious” public money used to finance the book launch.
“It is even more regrettable that the general is diminishing Pakistan in order to peddle his memoirs. By leaking secrets and classified information about issues of national interest, General Musharraf stands accused of violating the Official Secrets Act. No serving Army chief is permitted to speak on these matters. By violating the Official Secrets Act, General Musharraf is jeopardising Pakistan’s national security,” she said.
She said, “General Musharraf’s memoirs are a sad and poignant reminder of the damage that military rule has inflicted on Pakistan. His admission of creating the ruling king’s party, the PML-Q, is an open defiance of the oath he has taken as a military officer and as an Army chief, which prevents him from interfering in political matters.”
Benazir said such gross violation of the Constitution by successive military rulers has endangered the existence of Pakistan and it is ironical to see that Pakistan’s military generals are quick to surrender under foreign pressure, but are defiant in opposing any submission to civilian authorities.
“It is a disgrace to see General Musharraf criticising in his book Pakistan’s first popularly-elected prime minister, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Bhutto is not dependent on memoirs of unpopular military generals, who are unable to win any electoral seat without state patronage. Bhutto, on the other hand, remains the heartbeat of Pakistani people. He restored the respectability of a broken Pakistan and its fallen Army by uniting the country through a constitution and developing nuclear deterrence.”
She said, “Military generals should not forget the services of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who was a proud son of Pakistan, and who gave his life in defending Pakistan’s interests. Instead of blaming Bhutto of Pakistan’s dismemberment, General Musharraf is well advised to focus on the Ayub and Yahya dictatorships that sowed the seeds of division.”
Link
Skeptic786
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2006
- Messages
- 273
- Reaction score
- 0
Ayub Khan and his Army buddies rigged the elections to defeat...non other than the sister of Quid-i-Azam and the person who has the title madre-millat...i.e. Fatima Jinnah. She was the only person left who had widespread following in east pakistan ( bangladesh) as well as west pakistan (current day pakistan)....quite frankly the last hope in terms of keeping pakistan united. Does mushy book shed any light on this?????
whatabout after widespread floods in 1970 in east pakistan......no one from west pakistan high elites and certainly not Yahya Khan visited east pakistan to check on brothers and sisters there....how they had faired from this natural catastrophe.....is it any surprise that mujib who toured east pakistan extensively in the aftermaths of floods would storm to 100% sweep of the polls merely a year later. Does mushy mention this???
Whatabout the milatary being in power from 1958-1971 the period in which seeds of separation were sown...........any critical analysis of this? non i guess from the otherwise very frank musharaf.
whatabout after widespread floods in 1970 in east pakistan......no one from west pakistan high elites and certainly not Yahya Khan visited east pakistan to check on brothers and sisters there....how they had faired from this natural catastrophe.....is it any surprise that mujib who toured east pakistan extensively in the aftermaths of floods would storm to 100% sweep of the polls merely a year later. Does mushy mention this???
Whatabout the milatary being in power from 1958-1971 the period in which seeds of separation were sown...........any critical analysis of this? non i guess from the otherwise very frank musharaf.
It is an old thread, but I thought I should write something about the minds of Bangalis when Yahya Khan did not visit and the American aid came before any aid came from Karachi. The affected areas were totally ruined. At least 400,000 people died.
The entire Bangali population were angry with the west about this imhuman treatment. So, when came the election time people voted for the Awami League. For the last 8 years no one really bothered what Sk. Mujib was preaching. AL's 6-point program was also not popular because it was regarded as a recipe to break Pakistan into two.
But, the indifference to the victims of natural calamity made AL and its propaganda very popular among the voters. Voters turned out in numbers and voted against any party that were perceived weak to project the interest of east Pakistan.
After the election result, ZAB conspired not to hand over power to AL, anarchy began out of desperation in the east, and Yahya Khan found a context to send PA to quash the anarchy. The result was an independent Bangladesh. Everyone, even nature, played its role to break up Pakistan. But, men like ZAB were more responsible than the nature itself.
Very Old thread I know, but someone mentioned this to me , so I thought to add my thoughts.
J&K Operation failed because we as usual failed at grand strategy . Army Does one thing, Navy does one thing,SSG does one thing, ISI does one thing there is no coordination .
In America the Army has its own Airforce, on top of the Normal Airforce .1960s was a time when India was weak and good time to take the advantage, although of course with hindsight it was not the best idea
How do you measure Economy was at its Peak ? It america there are more millionaires and billionaires than ever but common middle class person does not think Economy is at its peak, same for the Indian economic bubble. Bhutto dramatically reduced poverty rates even with lower GDP growth
There was alot of opposition to Ayub Khan. If Bhutto didnt take it, then Fatimah Jinnah or somebody else wouldve. Ayub Khan was very unpopular, and his economic policies where highly dependent on US Aid. Aid which came with far too many conditions in ways which American Aid to India did not .
Bhutto was more like Hugo Chavez, whilst Ayub Khan was more like George Bush II
Bhutto was a true statemen a thinker and reformer which Pakistan has not seen since.
Bhutto nationalisation was targeted to the inefficient industries, which where not internationally competitive . Bhutto wanted to model pakistan on west germany and increase exports. He invested heavily in the nationalised industries, bhutto was not able to finish his economic agenda so you cant judge a painting thats not finished
Yayha Khan made the mistake of launching a military operation with out a Political Deal behind it. But in Reality Yayha Khan had already lost control of the East Pakistan Army Command.East Pakistan was already a defacto run by a different set of Generals
Mujib wanted a Confederation as a step towards secession(separate currencies very dodgy idea), Bhutto was against Mujib Unilaterally changing the constitution . You need all provinces to agree to any major change ( like 18th amendment in 2010). Bhutto was a skilled negotiator im sure he couldve saved the federation, if khan had not been so trigger happy. Countries are most vulnerable at times of election, just look at the CIA colour revolution in eastern europe. So 1971 saga was all planned. India signed so called friendship treaty with soviet union long time ago
is it possible for Punjab MNAs to unilaterally change the constitution with out the backing of the other provinces ?
In america to get a constitutional amendment , the President needs the support of 75% of the states
Bhutto never said idher hum, under tum or what ever that is false reporting .
East Pakistan was lost went Mujib won. He was an Indian agent. The debate is how did he win ? he won by exploiting 1970 cyclone,economic disparities and by hijacking the anti ayub Khan Movement
What happened in East Pakistan, is unprecedented in history . The West did nothing to come to Pakistans aid and the Russians fully backed India, whilst the American Congress imposed Arms sanctins on pakistan
The lesson of East Pakistan, is Keep control of Information dont allow foreign properganda into the country
Musheraff is also a Military person, its convenient all officers under Zia where brought up to believe Pak army is unbeatable and 1971 was the fault of Bhutto. Partly to increase Morale and also for political purposes.
Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was not to blame for East Pakistan, he was responsible for saving West Pakistan when entire world was predicting its downfall and people in pakistan didnt have clue of
what to do , he did
Bhutto didnt change constitution, his party did. With full support of the public or some cases due to public pressure. Its normall to pass new laws. One of Bhutto's greatest achievements is a consensus constitution.
He never beat up his own ministers,ego clashes are a part of Democracy. nawaz sharif was the real fascist, forcing through laws in Parliament buying votes ,scaring others MNas, bulling Supreme Court,15th Amendment etc
thats why no one came to his recuse after the coup. But 40 years on still Bhutto has supporters
Bhutto was not the main person responsible for 71' ,he never said that. ZAB was not a heavy drinker womanizer lol, stop making false accusations .
Bhutto never exploited religion for politics , like you just tried to do.Religion Exploiting title goes to other politicians. Bhutto was progressive he wanst secular or fundamentalist
Musheraff made many mistakes, failed to reform madressa or women rights. Relied too heavily on america and was not really secular
Ambitious449
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2011
- Messages
- 714
- Reaction score
- 0
Pakistani Army was ruling the country at that time. First they created havoc by brutal force and then simply failed to defend their territory. As simple as that.
Syed Naved
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2011
- Messages
- 470
- Reaction score
- 0
In the History of Pakistan there is one & only busterd is ZAB , Does onething break quids United Pakistan,he is the real busterd
Syed Brother,Sorry To say , but It was none but Bhutto.In hotel Inter continental it was whom who ordered," Do the massacar ",bhutto is the responsible one
asad71
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- May 24, 2011
- Messages
- 6,863
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
1.This illegitimate son of Shanawaz has been a cancer introduced into the body and soul of Pakistan. He spent his youth as a playboy in Mumbai for which many have suspected him to be carrying a deep Indian agenda. At Karachi he was introduced by Iskandar Mirza to Ayub - and thus began his rise on the ladder through shameless unabashed sycophancy of Ayub. Mirza and Bhutto had Iranian wives who had been class-mates.
2. Arresting Pakistan's fantastic economic growth through the '65 War, betraying the Kashmiris with a botched-up insincere Op Gibraltar, conspiring the '71 crack-down, letting loose a reign of terror in Baluchistan, disturbing the centuries old traditional socio-political system in Northern Area thus giving birth to the current crisis and eliminating opponents without remorse are hall mark of ZAB's biography.
3. "Main' is haramzada ko Shakarparian pahar par phansi dunga", Gen Ziaul Huq.
2. Arresting Pakistan's fantastic economic growth through the '65 War, betraying the Kashmiris with a botched-up insincere Op Gibraltar, conspiring the '71 crack-down, letting loose a reign of terror in Baluchistan, disturbing the centuries old traditional socio-political system in Northern Area thus giving birth to the current crisis and eliminating opponents without remorse are hall mark of ZAB's biography.
3. "Main' is haramzada ko Shakarparian pahar par phansi dunga", Gen Ziaul Huq.
Similar threads
