Originally Posted by hkbajwa

Hmmm.. well i am not entirely sure what it is that you think is so completely off the mark. Just to assist you , i will give you a quick summary before i answer your questions

1) Agreeing with some of the points raised by OBL, Ahmedinejad and their ilk IS NOT THE SAME AS SUPPORTING VIOLENT TERRORIST MEANS. This is a distinction that is important to make, which this hugely biased article would rather that you didn't. It won't be nearly as alarming ( and hence useless to those who wish to create cohesion around the glorious fight against the evil adversary). If he was to say that of those 300 million most of them just agree with the COMPLAINT and NOT with the violent "solution" that OBL suggests, then suddenly the spectre of militant Islam wouldn't be quite as scary now would it?

2) The fact that your people do not support the government's actions is a FAILURE OF THE GOVERNMENT.. not its PEOPLE. Which is something the article vehemently opposes. The onus is put ont he people for not supporting a crazy war unquestioningly ( like good little zombies do)

3) The comparison to WW2 is moot. This world is nothing like the world in the 40s, your country is not the same and MOST IMPORTANTLY - This enemy has NOTHING IN COMMON with the enemy of WW2 ( apart from being the opposition to the US).

4) Bush has done EVERYTHING wrong in the WOT. He alienated where he should have secured allies. He invaded a completely UNINVOLVED country in a devastating war. Every move he has made has VERIFIABLY made your lives less secure. Yet the author has the nerve to say that he was right and everybody else was wrong. See that would only make sense if he had been PREVENTED from doing anything. As we all know, Bush actually did EVERYTHING he wanted to - and it has all failed miserably. That is not the people's fault. That is Bush's fault.

It is his fault that you are more hated, less trusted and more threatened now than you have ever been in your history. But the author apparently can't see what the world can see.


Anyhow to your questions:

Personally i am quite fond of Musharraf. But let's jsut say he is the lesser evil. Bhutto and her husband looted the country TWICE. So did the Sharif brothers. Their administrations were marked by massive corruption, nepotism and a civil dictatorship.
Whatever Musharraf is, his regime has changed the face of Pakistan. I would rather that Bhutto and Sharif stayed out of Pakistan and left it to Musharraf to take us through the next 5 years. During this time the media could foster a proper political consciousness in the people, so that new blood could take over the reins once Musharraf leaves.
Musharraf is better for the women and minorities of Pakistan. He presents the BEST HOPE for a moderate muslim culture becoming dominant in Pakistan. He may not be the last line of defence against the fundamentalists, but he is unlike any previous ruler in that his major support does NOT come from the religious right.


My signature means precisely what it says. I have no hatred for anybody. At worst i have pity, but that too comes from the love i carry for all human beings.

I pity OBL. I also pity Bush. Both are humans that at some point or the other have been ruined. So much so, that they actually BELIEVE what they are doing is right. If a man is doing wrong, yet believes that he is right.. should one hate him? or should one pity him for being so wrong?

I feel that you may trying to get me to "choose sides". I am sure you will believe that if i don't seethe with anger when i speak of OBL, or curse him or damn him, then i am a supporter of terrorist means. Well that would be completely untrue.

I do not judge anybody. Everybody must face their own maker, and i am certainly not one to pass judgement on another's righteoussness. OBL does what he does. Your president does what he does. Both use violence to solve problems ( to bring peace they say). BOTH are responsible for countless deaths. Both are completely convinced of their righteousness.

So there is no side to choose. There are merely two sides to the same coin.

I am half danish and half pakistani. My mothers side is protestant christian, and my father's side is muslim. I happen to be able to view the situation from a third perspective and i can tell you that EVERYBODY got it wrong. OBL, Bush/Cheney, ahmedinejad etc etc. Each is so terribly convinced of their own righteousness that they will kill to enforce it.

I ask you.. what difference is there between Sharia and Democracy, when both are imposed at the tip of a gun?