Only the Bush administration would invade one country and topple its dictator in the name of democracy and then defend another from a pro-democracy revolution. And we wonder why the rest of the world hates us.

Musharraf may NOT be the angel people are looking for, but he is the best Pakistan has at the moment. At least during his rule, schools are open and businesses are flourishing. Corruption can be lower, but that is embedded in that culture like many other countries in the region.

Do we have any other Choice but Musharraf ???? Benazir and Nawaz Sharif have been time tested they have failed big time. All the opposition parties have exploited the situation and are using the former Chief Justice to reach their own goals. Mr.Iftikhar should understand that he should not let the crooked politicians use him and should think about his country and its survival. If they topple Musharraf, they will end up fighting with each other for the top position and this is not a prediction its a fact.

It is high time that the US sends an unambiguous message to the world that it supports democracies whatever be the political considerations.Its credibility has suffered serious dents over the years because of its overt support to dictatorial regimes and military juntas whenever those regimes were pliable. It is difficult to convince the world that it is bent upon bringing democracy to Iraq through five star generals and military action. Such a policy is bound to be viewed as double-faced.

President Musharraf must always be aware that some other person or group is trying to him fall from power, but With his Generals behind him I believe he will prevail,

"Only the Bush administration..." shows off the not-so-hidden agenda of the writer and a lack of knowledge of history. Examine the Kennedy and Johnson administrations and their foreign policies which are not far off with the same support for pro-Western dictatorships. From a pragmatic viewpoint, no administration has ever been pure in their support of idealistic forms of government. Countries and their leaders always look out to maintain favorable balances of international power. None of our leaders have ever been naive in their wielding of international power. Some have just been more obvious about it.

When it comes to the Muslim world, the White House adminstration both Republicans and Democrats have mastered the art of how to loose friends and gain enemies in that part of the world. And it keeps getting worse. Aligining with despotic, dictators and royals from north Africa to Pakistan is a short term gain( very debatable) to certain long term loss. Why do they hate us? The answer is a lot closer - in the White House. There is a saying: Colt 45 made all man equal. In the future technology will make these poeple will make them equal in terms of Colt 45. Better turn things around before it is too late and 9/11 will sound like a fire cracker going off. Make friends with people - dictators.

Maintaining U.S hedgemony is at the center of U.S foreign policy. Briton had its day in the sun, and so did Rome. Its the U.S's turn to rule the world untill the next hedgemond takes over (possibly China). Pakistan, and Musharaff are just tiny pieces in the bigger picture. Spreading Democracy is NOT our goal (like some ppl would lead us believe) Keeping our position in the world IS our goal. So lets be honest with ourselves and the rest of the world: Call a spade a spade.

Musharraf is not the best Pakistan has, Merchant from Del Rio, Texas. In case you have'nt been back there in the last eight years, people actually remember Nawaz Sharif (who he deposed) with fond nostalgia. Pakistan was a far better place to live in before Musharraf usurped power in 1998. The much vaunted growth rate and forex reserves are completely meaningless when 70% of the population lives on less than 2 dollars a day, when 80% of the country does not have access to potable water, when the government is considering a five-day work week to deal with a power crisis, when two provinces are in the grip of insurgencies, when inflation is the highest it has ever been in the nation's country and when Musharraf has removed all constitutional limits to his power and has become an absolute monarch. Musharraf is the PROBLEM. He is not a part of the solution. Democracy, no matter how flawed, is better than a military dictatorship. Pakistanis must throw their support behind Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. For the first time in Pakistan there is a genuine movement against authoritarianism, a movement for constitutionalism and democracy. The military must be relegated to the barracks once and for all. They must have no role in politics. We need a constitutional amendment that makes a military takeover an act of treason. We need to make an example of Musharraf so that the army never dares to meddle in politics again.The army has ruled Pakistan for thirty five years out of the sixty it has existed. It has presided over three failed wars, the secession of Bangladesh and has treated the constitution of Pakistan like toilet paper. It is responsible for destroying our country.

Corruption is like a flea on a good dog. You can controll it but you can not get rid of it. So it is actually there naturally. Pakistan is no different than any other democracy. How you controll it, (corruption), is what will be judged by the world. Listen up Washington!

Musharraf is playing both sides against the middle, a very dangerous game. He's trying to please the Army and the U.S. while giving aid, comfort and sactuary to Al Quaida and the Taliban. His strong-arn tactics virtually assure that one day, an Islamic state will overthrow him---an Islamic state with U.S-supplied nukes...

go musharaf go

Considering that Pakistan was on the U.S.'s sh** list prior to Sept. 11 over their nuclear program, and considering the fact that it was a Pakistani nuclear physicist who passed on nuclear info to other nations, and considering that Musharraf did oust a democratically elected President, and considering the possibility that Osama is probably somewhere within his country, it just doesn't add up.
He's sneaky, he's cunning, and he's backed by the army, a troubling trifecta of subterfuge.
Plus, his neighbors don't like him!

I think since August 14 1947, democracy is really flourishing in Pakistan for the first time, economy is growing, hopefully first time in history the lawmakers assembly will complete its tenure, the press has never been free ever in Pakistan, under Musharraf press and media is writing and publishing everything they can and critisize govt in anyway they can without any consequences. The old corrupt politicians need to go, this won't happen until the people of Pakistan realize that they are their worst enemies and they keep on voting for the same crooks who have been plundering Pakistan for the past 40 plus years. I hope that Musharraf gets all the support from US and the people of Pakistan, otherwise....history will repeat itself and the same old corrupt politicians will be back running the show.

http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/19/nat8.htm http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/15/nat5.htm http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/31/nat18.htm http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/17/local9.htm

To paraphrase the famous quip during the 1992 US presidential debates, when an unknown William Jefferson Clinton told then-president George Herbert Walker Bush, "It's the economy, stupid," the present concern of the current Washington administration over Darfur in southern Sudan is not, if we look closely, genuine concern over genocide against the peoples in that poorest of poor part of a forsaken section of Africa. No. "It's the oil, stupid." The case of Darfur, a forbidding piece of sun-parched real estate in the southern part of Sudan, illustrates the new Cold War over oil, where the dramatic rise in China's oil demand to fuel its booming growth has led Beijing to embark on an aggressive policy of - ironically - dollar diplomacy. With its more than US$1.2 trillion in mainly US dollar reserves at the Peoples' National Bank of China, Beijing is engaging in active petroleum geopolitics. Africa is a major focus, and in Africa, the central region between Sudan and Chad is a priority. This is defining a major new front in what, since the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, is a new Cold War between Washington and Beijing over control of major oil sources. So far Beijing has played its cards a bit more cleverly than Washington. Darfur is a major battleground in this high-stakes contest for oil control. China oil diplomacy In recent months, Beijing has embarked on a series of initiatives designed to secure long-term raw materials sources in one of the planet's most endowed regions - Sub-Saharan Africa. No raw material has higher priority in Beijing at present than oil. Today China draws an estimated 30% of its crude oil from Africa. That explains an extraordinary series of diplomatic initiatives which have left Washington furious. China is using no-strings-attached dollar credits to gain access to Africa's vast raw material wealth, leaving Washington's typical control game via the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) out in the cold. Who needs the painful medicine of the IMF when China gives easy terms and builds roads and schools to boot? In November last year Beijing hosted an extraordinary summit of 40 African heads of state. They literally rolled out the red carpet for the leaders of, among others, Algeria, Nigeria, Mali, Angola, Central African Republic, Zambia and South Africa. China has just done an oil deal that links it with two of the continent's largest nations, Nigeria and South Africa. China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) will lift oil in Nigeria, via a consortium that also includes South African Petroleum Co, giving China access to what could be 175,000 barrels a day by 2008. It's a $2.27 billion deal that gives state-controlled CNOOC a 45% stake in a large off-shore oil field in Nigeria. Previously, Nigeria had been considered in Washington to be an asset of the Anglo-American oil majors, ExxonMobil, Shell and Chevron. China has been generous in dispensing its soft loans, with no interest or as outright grants, to some of the poorest debtor states of Africa. The loans have gone into infrastructure, including highways, hospitals, and schools, a stark contrast to the brutal austerity demands of the IMF and World Bank. In 2006 China committed more than $8 billion to Nigeria, Angola and Mozambique, versus $2.3 billion to all sub-Saharan Africa from the World Bank. Ghana is negotiating a $1.2 billion Chinese electrification loan. Unlike the World Bank, a de facto arm of US foreign economic policy, China shrewdly attaches no strings to its loans. This oil-related Chinese diplomacy has led to the bizarre accusation from Washington that Beijing is trying to "secure oil at the sources", something Washington foreign policy has itself been preoccupied with for at least a century. No source of oil has been more the focus of China-US oil conflict of late than Sudan, home of Darfur. Sudan's oil riches Beijing's China National Petroleum Company (CNPC) is Sudan's largest foreign investor, with some $5 billion in oil field development. Since 1999 China has invested at least $15 billion in Sudan. It owns 50% of an oil refinery near Khartoum with the Sudan government. The oil fields are concentrated in the south, site of a long-simmering civil war, partly financed covertly by the United States to break the south from the Islamic Khartoum-centered north. CNPC built an oil pipeline from southern Sudan to a new terminal at Port Sudan on the Red Sea, where the oil is loaded on tankers bound for China. Eight percent of China's oil now comes from southern Sudan. China takes 65-80% of Sudan's 500,000 barrels/day production. Sudan last year was China's fourth-largest foreign oil source. In 2006 China passed Japan to become the world's second-largest importer of oil after the United States, importing 6.5 million barrels a day of the black gold. With its oil demand growing by an estimated 30% a year, China will pass the US in oil import demand in a few years. That reality is the motor driving Beijing foreign policy in Africa. A look at the southern Sudan oil concessions shows that China's CNPC holds rights to bloc 6, which straddles Darfur, near the border with Chad and the Central African Republic. In April 2005, Sudan's government announced that it had found oil in Southern Darfur, which is estimated to be able to pump 500,000 barrels per day when developed. The world press forgot to report that vital fact in discussing the Darfur conflict. Move to militarize Sudan's oil region Genocide was the preferred theme, and Washington was the orchestra conductor. Curiously, while all observers acknowledge that Darfur has seen a large human displacement and human misery, with tens of thousands or even as many as 300,000 deaths in the last several years, only Washington and the non-governmental organizations (NGOs) close to it use the charged term "genocide" to describe Darfur. If they are able to get popular acceptance of the charge of genocide, it opens the possibility of drastic "regime change" intervention by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) - read Washington - in Sudan's sovereign affairs. The genocide theme is being used, with full-scale Hollywood backing from the likes of stars like George Clooney, to orchestrate the case for de facto NATO occupation of the region. So far the Sudan government has vehemently refused, not surprisingly. The US government repeatedly uses "genocide" to refer to Darfur. It is the only government to do so. US Assistant Secretary of State Ellen Sauerbrey, head of the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration, said during a USINFO online interview last November 17, "The ongoing genocide in Darfur, Sudan - a gross violation of human rights - is among the top international issues of concern to the United States." The Bush administration keeps insisting that genocide has been going on in Darfur since 2003, despite the fact that a five-person UN mission led by Italian Judge Antonio Cassese reported in 2004 that genocide had not been committed in Darfur but grave human rights abuses were committed. They called for war crime trials. Merchants of death The United States, acting through surrogate allies in Chad and neighboring states has trained and armed the Sudan Peoples' Liberation Army, headed until his death in July 2005 by John Garang, trained at the US Special Forces school at Fort Benning, Georgia. By pouring arms into first southeastern Sudan and since discovery of oil in Darfur into that region as well, Washington fueled the conflict that led to tens of thousands dying and several million driven to flee their homes. Eritrea hosts and supports the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA), the umbrella NDA opposition group, and the Eastern Front and Darfur rebels. There are two rebel groups fighting in Sudan's Darfur region against the Khartoum central government of President Omar al-Bashir - the Justice for Equality Movement and the larger Sudan Liberation Army (SLA).

Had the George Bush been interested in democracy in the middle east, it would have started with governments such as the ones in Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. That's where most terrorists come from. Before the invasion, no terrorist came from Iraq. The dictatorship in Pakistan, as ugly as it is, is hailed by Bush as a true friend of the U.S. So, as far as who are the good guys, they are the ones that support George Bush'(and Dick Chanie's) plans for world domination of the oil markets. They are ones who are willing to give up the ideals of their people for a couple of bucks in a Swiss account.

Something worth considering. What might be the worst case scenario for an extremist Islamic state armed with a nuclear weapon? Musharraf, for the international community at least, is the lesser of two evils.

It is a very simple idea, but very hard to accomplish: As long as the moderate Muslims will take the responsiblity for their government, there is no need for a Dictator to rule. If the government falls into the hands of the Radical Muslims, then Musharraf needs to stay to prevent that. So it is up to the moderate Muslims to keep both the dictators and the radicals out of power and to be strong armed against both if they decide to start their trouble. I have seen very little in the way of the moderate Muslims in any country speaking out against both extremes. They may not be capable of being free and need to have someone tell them what to do.

Sounds like what Musharraf is doing is similar to what Bush attempted. Bush overplayed his hand, the people got tired of it. there are too many sources of information now for Bush tactics to work . I hope the next pres understands that. Bush is toast. it is too bad he cannot replaced without impeachment. We need a new system so that when a president is this far gone he can be replaced without a nasty impeachment.

You guys, just one thing, remember that Pakistan posesea nuclear arms and whatever in going on there good or bad and the outcome, is important to everybody specially to the U.S

It is sad that Mr Bush who champions democracy in Irag will support a dictatorial regime for the simple fact that it aligns with his war on terror. As long as we have these inconsistencies, there will never be peace in the world.

Since Pakistan has been a military ruled state for most of the time it has existed, the chances of it becoming a democracy anytime in the future is very bleak. In fact, Pakistan is the only country in the world that was founded with a constitution, but has never had the people's will to exercise it ever. What is lacking is the people's (of Pakistan) will to establish the rule of law and follow a democratic path for the society. All that is required from the People of Pakistan to change their society is to make some sacrifices, such as their valuable time and resources and come out in large numbers in the open and start a civil disobedience movement in which there will be no violence or disruption to the soceity. To prevent any harm coming on themselves, the protesters should simply start gathering in public places with no Placards, banners, shoutings or outcry, but stand silently for a few hours. Give no reason for the regime to hurt or quell. Silence will speak up and the results will come in sooner. The world will understand that the people are displaying their anger through silence. This should be a large movement, enough to shame the regime and vacate on their own. Finally, when change comes or happens, the people should get their resolve to ensure and establish peoples rule with no role for the military to come for any time in the future. People of Pakistan should understand that thinking of conflict (War) with their neighbour(s) is the only reason for the military to be so big and overwhelming that they come back to rule them from time to time. With no such resolve and understanding, the people of Pakistan can only expect their society to be the same - the military of Pakistan will have nothing else to do when there is no war, so they will chose to rule the country.

Pakistan better under Nawaz??? HA! No way, not even close. Pakistan was a few days away from total bankruptcy in 1999 before Musharraf took over. Musharraf has helped Pakistan tremendously. Pakistan's economy has exploded over the past six years with 6.7%-9.0% GDP growth in those years. Pakistan's poverty level has been reduced significantly. Pakistan's FOREX reserves have reached its highest levels ever and the KSE markets have reached an all time high. Pakistan has privatized telecom. and banking resulting in a huge uplift for all Pakistanis. Pakistanis now have widespread access to financing for autos,homes and commerical enterprises. Pakistan is now conducting various Mega infrastructure projects to build the economy for the future. To build a strong economy in Pakistan there must be both Macro and Micro reforms. Macro economic policies are working and Micro policies have just begun. The coordination of the two will quell inflation (which is ALWAYS a problem with rapidly growing economies)and give Pakistanis a better quality of life. Pakistan doesn't those corrupt "democratic" governments of the past. Sharif and Bhutto are thieves and were detroying Pakistan. Democracy in Pakistan means a Elitist group running and plundering Pakistan. Those Elitists are only concerned about thier personal fortunes and the fortunes of thier friends and they care nothing for the average citizen. I live in Pakistan and I have seen a huge improvement over the past 8 years. God Bless Musharraf!

America should stop its double standards and for once become objective in its supposed role as defender and custodian of democracy-why being two faced.

What can I say - it is a doggy dog world. People blinded by greed and power. You scratch my back, I will do yours, let other go to hell.

Mr. Musharraf, you should know when your presence is no longer welcome. You should know that while people like me who admire your leadership and cant stomach the thought of corrupt and retarded politicians running the country, there is a bigger truth that is now overshadowing your patriotism and good deeds. Sir, your presence at current post is no longer acceptable to growing number of people and it is to the point that it doesnt matter any more whether you are the only choice. It is time for you to go. Finally, please send the army back to barracks. If we elect poor politicians, let us suffer. May be we will learn from our pain and losses and select better people next time. But the army has to stop interrupting the democratic process once and for all times to come.

Musharaf is the best person for pakistan and for the security of our country we need Musharaf in Pakistan. We cannot let extermists and so called damocrats like Benazeer, Nawaz Shareef or Itlaf hussain hold the counrty hostage and create monsters like Taliban and Alqaeda which attacked us on 9/11.

When President Musharraf seized power in a military coup 8 years ago, the U.S. imposed sanctions. After 9/11, Musharraf became our new best friend. The United States is far less interested in promoting "democracy" than it is in protecting its interests around the world.

Hello My friends. Musharraf is doing a great job in Pakistan.We had noting but a crooks & thief's leading our country before him. All they wanted to do was fill there pockets with our money and screw every living Pakistani in Pakistan. Before you point a finger toward Musharraf read the history of all Presidents before him and what they did for Pakistan and what he has done. People who criticize Musharraf are the biggest enemy of Pakistan.

Its very obvious now that Bush's policy's and war in the region have set off a chain reaction that i do not believe can be stopped now. Iraq/Saddam had a balancing effect in this region that is now gone. Iran is the major power and there has been a large swing to a more radical islam that will threaten Israel even more now than in the past. Israel helped this cause by overreacting and bombing/destroying Lebanon and causing more upheaval in the region. Bob Dylan said it best " when you have nothing, you have nothing to lose" Hundreds of thousands of refugees from Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza, with nothing to lose- sounds like alot of potental terrorists to me. Bush's policy's have become the #1 recruitment tool for terrorists around the world.

There will never be prosperity in Pakistan and true peace in that region till the Army and dictators like Musharraf rule that country. The people of Pakistan must rise up and ensure that a true Democracy takes hold. The citizens of Pakistan must then uproot the fundamentalist institutions in Pakistan. Only then can lasting peace and prosperity take hold in Pakistan. Otherwise they are heading for a very serious situation that will spin out of control.

Hmm, You give democracy to the Muslim world and you get....Hamas. Hizzbollah. Al Sadr. Thinking you can you can magically transform a region by "giving" it democracy shows a profound lack of understanding of how the concept of democracy developed in the western world to begin with. Democracy is the opposite of tribalism. That's why it doesn't work in the tribalist Muslim world.

Musharf is the best leader for Pakistan right now.

The government of Musharrafis is a dictorship plain and simple. Colin Powell said the US government does not have a convince of marriage to any dictorship, he was wrong they had one remember Saddam Hussein. The US government has no morals. They will sleep with the enemy if it meets their objective. What a joke

The only way the to make sense of what we are doing is to assume that pundits ( Rowe, CIA, or somebody ) has concluded that planet earth is not big enough for the religion of free will, personal responsibility and forgiveness to coexist with the religion of authority, subjugation of free will, and revenge. Consequently, we're doing what we can to arrange for both factions of the other side to have leadership, weapons and delivery systems so that eventually they can nuke it out, minimizing the number and power of the survivors that Western society will eventually have to deal with. Musharrif is just a chess piece, but he's one of ours right now.

Musharaf is the best president ever in the history of Pakistan.

Pakistan doesnt need democracy!!! People over there are not capable of holding on to democracy. And the reason is that most people in that country are looking out for their pockets not for the betterment of the country. Also this country is divided along ethnic lines. Someone is a Mahajir, Punjabi etc. No one is a Pakistani!!!! I have yet to meet anyone in the US who says I am a New Yorker, Texan etc. They all say I am an American!!!

Democracy does not itself bring either peace or good governance. Just look at the Palestinians, and their fairly elected, fully democratic, and thoroughly irrational, self-destructive, and evil Hamas government. Unless you are the type of person who cheers every time a "martyr" blows up a bus full of "infidels" then true democracy is the last thing you want to see in Egypt, Pakistan, and many other places (sadly) The call for democracy did make for great propaganda (and honest critique) against the Soviets twenty years ago, but anyone who follows events these days ought to know better than to think that it's going to help ease the great conflict of our age. Sadly, our only hope of avoiding WWIII lies in leaders like Musharraf who have the sense and strength to supress their own population's bloody desires. Perhaps after the Islamic Reformation these countries will be ready for democracy but for now pray that Musharraf survives.

When the Indian subcontinent got its Independence only one country got true Independence India, the other Pakistan was colonized again this time by its Army. What a shame. Today Pakistanis need to wake up and demand their freedoms again not from the haughty british but from their own modern colonial masters. Let freedom ring....We are with you Mr Chief Justice...GO Musharaf GO.

Ron. S, I don't blame you for thinking that Musharraf shouldn't have ousted a "democratically elected President," but you should know the background behind the story before judging Musharraf so severely for that act. Nawaz Sharif was an affluent land-owner who got voted to be prime minister of Pakistan at that time. However, you have to keep in mind how corrupt all of our prime ministers and politicians have been over the years, and one also has to keep in mind that corruption easily leads to rigged elections in Pakistan. Nawaz Sharif was no better than the rest..he turned out to be as bad as Benazir Bhutto was for Pakistan.. he put our country in millions of dollars worth of debt that we are still trying to pay off. He had offshore bank accounts and was involved in all sorts of other shady activity.. Together, he and his brother, Shabaz Sharif, terrorized law-abiding Pakistani citizens who got in their way. My mother and baby sister were on the plane along with Musharraf when the coup took place in 1999. Nawaz Sharif ordered the plane not to land because he knew Musharraf was on his way to take over control of the government. There was a large group of school children flying back from a sports convention in Sri Lanka on that plane, as well, and when the pilot told Nawaz Sharif that they were running out of fuel and needed to land ASAP, Nawaz Sharif told the pilot not to land under any circumstances. Does that sound like a rational sort of person to you? Thankfully, the plane made an emergency landing in Karachi before they ran out of fuel, and Musharraf has been in control of our government ever since. But you also have to know the country to know that he has made many economic, infrastructural, and education-related improvements in Pakistan over the past 8 years.. and for that, I am thankful.

Military is THE scourge of pakistan. It has to be once and for all taken to task. The generals are the most incompetent, corrupt lot. They have destroyed institutions. Without institutions and rule of law prosperity cannot happen.

I read this messages from the various peoples and I am constantly amazed at the fluidity of their morals. The position of many of them is "because he's our ally in this war on terror" we give him a pass on the corruption and terror with which he uses to control his own people. He is no different in his methods than Sadam Hussein he just doesn't have oil. Additionally, I beg to differ with those of you, m. merchant, who think business and schools weren't functioning prior to this dictatorship. I work for a Pakistani family, I hear the truth(s) from them.

The ISI (Inter-Services-Intelligence) is the real power in Pakistan. The ISI is the Pakistan's national terrorist agency. It is where AlQuada and BinLadin came from. Some believe in the ISI 911 connection. Pakistan has the US over a barrel because it has nuclear weapons. The real issue is Kashmir!

He is good guy at least he is better than Benazir and Nawaz. Check out country progress.

Unfortunately the "liberal" media, not the US government, has legitimized dictators like Musharraf by calling Musharraf a "president." And while the US and Britain continue to pummel Venezuela's democratically-elected president, Tony Blair just visited and embraced a smiling Moammar Gaddafi, the dictator who has ruled oil-rich Libya with a brutal hand for almost 40 years and who murdered several hundred Americans in terrorist attacks. That pretty muchs tell me about the state of "democracy" in the US.

Pres.Gen.Musharaf in my opinion is a great person, we unfortunatly are now used to see every body either all good or all bad. He did a great job as a General, he has been forced to come in power(Is any body is questioning Mr nawaz shareef that why he was not allowing PIA plane carrying Gen. Musharaf with hundreds of other pakistani to land in the country or we forgot it). After becoming the president what challenges he faced and how nicely he kept Pakistan on the path of prosperity. Pakistani people knows every thing they are seeing each and every development, they are smart and can compare the PPP and Nawaz Shareef,s time. Pakistan need A STRONG Leader like Gen. Musharaf Bold, Honest and intelligent. who just want to develop Pakistan and improve ordinary Pakistani,s life. Dr.Khan, Madison, WI

this is so funny - what the world is figuring out about Musharraf now, the Indian government has been telling the world forever! Only now, suddenly Pakistan is such a darling of US media - how can you support a dictator when he sends jihadis to his neighboring country? I guess finally US foreign policy experts are realizing how much ignorant they are!

I hear Osama is staying at this house and using his pool.

"Do we have any other Choice but Musharraf ????" Who said it was our choice to make? Don't you think the Pakistani people can decide on their own?

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):