Skip to content

Pakistan Teaches the United States How a Democracy Should Work

August 19, 2008

Yesterday the people won, a corrupt leader stepped down, as the people wished. A man who basically did what he wanted, even if it was against the law. The fear of impeachment bought the resignation of this leader. Now don’t get all excited, it was not George W. Bush. No, yesterday pressured by possible impeachment Pakistani President Musharraf stepped down as advised by legal advisors.


In March 2007, his political structures started to collapse like a house of cards. It became clearer and clearer that Pervez Musharraf had but a single political interest: Pervez Musharraf.

The president took on Pakistan’s Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, who was becoming too independent for his tastes — and who consistently appealed for the rule of law.

Not only the judges and lawyers, but the media, civic society, political parties and hundreds of thousands of citizens showed solidarity with Chaudhry. They forced Musharraf to step down as commander in chief of the army this past autumn, and made him hold free elections in February.

The power struggle wasn’t only between democrats and Musharraf. His power had a lot to do with the political role of the army. His resignation is likely to strengthen civil institutions in relation to the armed forces over the long term.

One of the main reason the people turned on Musharraf was his close knit ties with the U.S.

Who would have thought, you do wrong as President and you would have to face the consequences? Not our legislative branch that’s for sure. George W. Bush has run the gambit when it comes to defying the law and the Constitution. The passage of the Patriot Act is one of the first steps that was taken by the legislature, to help enable this cabal to start to strip away the rights of the people of the United States. Voting to give the power of going to war help enable the murderous ways of this administration. The FISA bill gave them the legal power to do something they had been doing illegally for years, spy on the citizenry of the country. (Both MSM candidates voted for this bill.) And the list is long and wide.

In the case of Pakistan, the people spoken and Parliament listened, and pushed for impeachment knowing Musharraf could dissolve them.

The Pakistani constitution is contradictory in that, on the one hand, it gives parliament the possibility to impeach its president, but also gives the president the power to dissolve parliament.

We live in a country that its constitution does not allow such an action by its President. However, our legislature sits on its hands, watching this executive branch do what it damn well pleases and does nothing. But could it be as some have accused this administration, sending white powder to those who have gone against its wishes.


Anthrax, Inside Job?

White House on Cipro Before Attack


Despite multiple press reports confirming that White House staff began use of Cipro on September 11, 2001, the incomplete and evasive FOIA response from The White House consisted of a paltry, four e-mail messages and an “administrative alert” concerning testing procedures in reaction to the anthrax deaths of two postal workers, all of which were dated October 23 and October 24, 2001. Judicial Watch has appealed the FOIA response and will take strong legal action to uncover the truth despite the obstructionist tactics of the administration.


No comments yet

Let us know what you think.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: