John Galt Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h1aBshjF1CnfJ4noaEXA_Vb8dm-gD8SMANS04 ISTANBUL, Turkey (AP) — The Bush administration said Saturday it was deeply disturbed by the state of emergency in Pakistan and urged a swift return to a democratic and civilian government. "The U.S. has made clear it does not support extraconstitutional measures because those measures take Pakistan away from the path of democracy and civilian rule," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said. Rice said that to her knowledge, U.S. officials had yet to hear directly from Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, after his declaration. "Whatever happens we will be urging a quick return to civilian rule" Rice told reporters, and a "return to constitutional order and the commitment to free and fair elections." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Dravis Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 One of the few times I agree with Rice. I hope no one (or at least few people) get hurt - earlier I read a story about this that said he had troops in the streets. Probably isn't going to end well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentScope001 Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Well, I am in contact with the exile community of Pakistan. I think that while they may or may not like Musharrash, they certaintly don't like the other Presidental candinates, Bhutto and that last President of Pakistan, because those two candinates were corrupt. Seems as though the exiles believe that while a democracy is a good idea, the people who get elected act corrupt, and try to milk as much money as possible from the Pakistani government. At least the military won't get corrupted, they already got unlimited power. Then again, this is the Exile community. Seems like they made the desicion that the best thing to do is leave Pakistan. And they only rarely regretted it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabretooth Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 The Bush administration said Saturday it was deeply disturbed by the state of emergency in Pakistan and urged a swift return to a democratic and civilian government. "The U.S. has made clear it does not support extraconstitutional measures because those measures take Pakistan away from the path of democracy and civilian rule," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said. Pfft. Pakistan has been a "democratic" government only in name. They've always been a dictatorship, in one form or another, in one name or another. It's painfully obvious that Musharraf is doing this to avert the political elections that had been forced onto Pakistan. Since that would jeopardize his position, he does some sneaky stuff, now Pakistan is extra-constitutional, and bang, the elections are "postponed" to next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Galt Posted November 5, 2007 Author Share Posted November 5, 2007 Personally, I think any spokesman of the Bush administration telling another government to return to constitutional government is massively hypocritical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentScope001 Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Pfft. Pakistan has been a "democratic" government only in name. They've always been a dictatorship, in one form or another, in one name or another. Wait, you're accusing Bhutto of being a dictator as well? Wow. You're pretty cynical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabretooth Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Wait, you're accusing Bhutto of being a dictator as well? Wow. You're pretty cynical. No, I'm Indian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentScope001 Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 No, I'm Indian. Understandable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Personally, I think any spokesman of the Bush administration telling another government to return to constitutional government is massively hypocritical. Bush isn't a dictator. Learn the definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediAthos Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 From what I've read Musharraf did what he did to avoid possibly being thrown out of office: "Musharraf, who took power in a 1999 coup and is also head of Pakistan's army, suspended the constitution on Saturday ahead of a Supreme Court ruling on whether his recent re-election as president was legal. He ousted independent-minded judges, put a stranglehold on independent media and granted sweeping powers to authorities to crush dissent." (From the AP article on Yahoo.com) With our system of checks and balances it is unlikely this could happen in the US unless the president had the complete support of all the military commanders which is also unlikely. At any rate, I don't agree with what Pakistan's President has done which was basically to preserve his own power base. He kinda reminds of me of a certain other dictator who recently swung by his neck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Web Rider Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Bush isn't a dictator. Learn the definition. And to be technically correct, neither is Musharraf, but the point was that the Bush administration has passed a number of "extra-constitutional" laws. And is now telling another country not to do it. yes, they aren't the same and they aren't as far reaching, but the parallels are there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Bush isn't a dictator. Learn the definition.True Bush is not a dictator, but he also is not great believer in following the document he is sworn to follow. Examples of Bush's signing statements So I agree with John Galt if I was Musharraf I’d tell Rice, and Bush for that matter, to stuff it in their ears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerbieZ Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 I am still unsure as to why only America feels it should advise Pakistan on what to do. Trying to put too many fingers into them middle eastern pies imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Dravis Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Whether it's hypocritical or not for the Bush administration to say it doesn't change the truth value of the statements in question. Pakistan should not be a dictatorship and I will agree with anyone who says so, be it Bush or anyone else. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. I don't really see the sense of saying "well, this guy isn't the best example so he should be ignored." - especially when "this guy" happens to be right (if only in this instance). Valid criticism is valid criticism, whoever might say it. No one should allow someone's reputation influence their evaluation of that person's actions. Even if it's Bush, and even if you think he's hateable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Galt Posted November 5, 2007 Author Share Posted November 5, 2007 I never called Bush a dictator, and he really isn't one, but he really has disregarded the constitution almost entirely. To quote Bush on the constitution: "It's just a goddamned piece of paper." His criticism may be valid, but so is pointing out his hypocracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Where'd he say that? I have NEVER heard him say that. And if he actually did say that, it'd be everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Where'd he say that? I have NEVER heard him say that. And if he actually did say that, it'd be everywhere. It was reported by the Capitol Hill Blue that Mr. Bush said that in 2005 in the Oval Office to a group of Republican Congressional leader while talking about renewing the Patriot Act. Capitol Hill Blue Several other news sources quote this, but they all show this as the original source as far as I can tell. I’m not saying it is true, but I could not find a denial from the White House and I find that a little odd. I’m more shocked by what former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is credited with writing while Attorney General in the article than the President's comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Of course, there's no real evidence he actually did say that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Yea, if you want to look at it that way then there is no real evidence that Abraham Lincoln ever said the Gettysburg Address either. After all it was not caught on video, just some people are said to have witnessed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Call me cynical, but I just love how the author claims he talked to three people, but fails to name them. Deep background, no doubt. Seriously, it's very easy to make all sorts of claims, but it detracts from the media's credibility when they make claims that aren't substantiated and then try to fall back on some journalistic prerogative of unnamed sources. Easy way to grind your axe. Note:maybe he said it, maybe not. That article fails to clear it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 No one in their right mind would ever call the constitution "Just a goddamned piece of paper." Particularly considering that Bush is at least a Christian in name, and thus would be hesitant to say "Goddamned." It doesn't click. Totenkopf's point is also quite true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediAthos Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Having perused the website a bit, I'm not sure I would exactly call the Capitol Hill Blue a reliable source of accurate information. The reference to the Gettysburg Address above is inaccurate as well as there are several preserved drafts of the speech in the Library of Congress, a photo of Lincoln at Gettysburg, and reputable accounts from newspapers of the day detailing the speech. I apologize for getting off topic briefly...I think that given that every slightly controversial move that any other politician makes, not just Bush, and not just in the the US, receives criticism from the UN and whomever else sees fit to throw in their opinion, why shouldn't Condi, and President Bush be allowed to have their opinion as well. It doesn't make them any different than anyone else in the world as far as I can see. As far as charges of hypocrisy go, I would consider most politicians to hypocrites to be honest with you. Very few of them say what they mean or do what they say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Never said that Capitol Hill Blue was a reliable source, just said they were the ones to report him saying it. I for one don’t know if Bush said it or not (as I stated above). I also know that Lincoln did the Gettysburg Address. I am also sure there are secure transcripts and photos of President Bush’s meeting with Congressional leaders that could answer if he really said this. Something we will never know for National Security reasons or at least for 50 years (and rightfully so). I’m a Christian and I have unfortunately taken the lords name in vain, so I fail to see how that is proof. I believe actions speak louder than words anyway and this administration’s actions speak volumes about their feelings for the Constitution. To me deleting our rights in the name of security only means the terrorist are winning. That is after all what they want, for us to sacrifice our values until we are willing to conform to their belief system. They don’t know it, but that is why they will never win. As American’s we are too hard headed to let anyone tell us what to do or think. So why should we expect to tell another sovereign nation what to do? What gives us the right to tell anyone how to run their nation? Is it because we are so good at running our own? Sure the Constitution is” just a piece of paper” when it goes against your core values. It really upsets me that it allows people to burn our flag in the name of free speech, but for all its faults it is the best thing going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Yes, you did. You implied it by using it as a source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Yes, you did. You implied it by using it as a source.Oh, really that not what I wrote. If you would have read what I wrote you would have known I was answering your inquire about where that quote came from. Never implied anything and I even stated that I didn’t know if it was true are not. Where'd he say that? I have NEVER heard him say that. And if he actually did say that, it'd be everywhere.It was reported by the Capitol Hill Blue... I’m not saying it is true.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.