Quote:
Originally Posted by Gypsified
As I recall with my doubtful ability to grasp things, you were telling me something about the ‘speeches’ of some cabinet ministers. I didn’t find any ‘speeches’ in any of these links. Please keep trying to locate those imaginary speeches. My Google search does not offer imaginary results (perhaps you can teach me that).
Moreover, where is the ‘bold’ content of these ‘speeches’ directed at the military? All I can see is people talking about Musharraf (your babble about the relevance of whom I’ll come to shortly). May be my legendary inability to comprehend things hinders me, but I hope you can see the difference between talk shows and what a minister tells to some anchors (about one guy, while also clarifying that this is nothing about military) and the speeches of the cabinet members targeting military? (any rumors of anything against the military, by the way, the ministers themselves have 'categorically' denied more than once, those liars!) .
|
Speech defined: The act of delivering spoken communication to an audience
Now let me reproduce everything with explanation so that your brain, which is most probably on rent at the moment, can process things more easily.
Link 1: Khwaja Saad Rafique calls Musharraf a Coward.
http://tune.pk/video/2079381/pervaiz...a-saad-rafique
Of course, claiming a retired Military General was a coward did not go well into some Military circles.
Link 2: Khwaja Asif denouncing Musharraf implicitly and explicitly.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1j...news?start=119
As I said, Army was not pleased yet again.
Link 3: Chaudhry Nisar makes the tumultuous relationship between the Army and the Government public
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDOHK6sGgCY
Of course, Interior Minister making such statement is uncalled-for.
Link 4: Ahsan Iqbal claims Musharraf treason case is not, in any way, related to the Army.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YPq7vr7cxU
The Army, though, was not too happy to see its former General being labelled as traitor, and then the government unilaterally deciding that it was not related to the Army.
Link 5: Khwaja Asif Questions the bravery of Musharraf
http://tribune.com.pk/story/693754/a...-khawaja-asif/
Army, yet again, perturbed.
Link 6: Khwaja Asif claims on the floor of National Assembly that it (NA) is the supreme institution is Pakistan, and thus can criticize the anyone and everyone (that clearly includes Army too) if it wants. The comment is a direct response to a concern shown by Corps Commander meeting.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1n...q-vs-army_news
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gypsified
Moreover, where is the ‘bold’ content of these ‘speeches’ directed at the military?
|
The statements are bold due the fact that Civilian Government has never been able to criticize the role of Armed Forces in this country. Plain and simple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gypsified
May be my legendary inability to comprehend things hinders me, but I hope you can see the difference between talk shows and what a minister tells to some anchors (about one guy, while also clarifying that this is nothing about military) and the speeches of the cabinet members targeting military?
|
Now here is what I said earlier.
Speeches of the members of the Cabinet, in particular Khwaja Asif, in chronological order seemed to be getting bolder despite the fact that Army had kept a safe distance from the parliament in the last 6 years.
The aforementioned links justify that.
But then again, I am arguing with someone who failed to understand simple English time and again.
Of course your Google search never produced those results. You are too old to be using Google old man, it needs a bit of a brain to get where one wants to get on Google too. Brain,though, is in short supply at your side. Or perhaps the problem lies with eye sight. What happened to your typewriter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gypsified
Let’s set that record straight too. You informed me that by writing “Musharraf’s pal” I had dragged history. To which I clarified that it was not me but you, the truthful guy, who did that. I further mentioned the rumors that “Imran’s circus has been encouraged by the military to seek Musharraf’s exoneration” even though “there is probably not much evidence for that”. You retorted with “There is not much evidence for that. Thank you. I ask you, however, is there any evidence whatsoever? Until you find that, It is not relevant to the current crisis”.
Since you asked me, I gave the evidence (which I already said was not much) about the rumors that “Imran’s circus has been encouraged by the military to seek Musharraf’s exoneration”. And you went back on the old Musharraf-Imran Pal thing because, unfortunately for you, the “bold speeches of cabinet members” that you were to tell me about were also about Musharraf and not military. I was right when I diagnosed short term memory problem here.
|
Yeah, right. Go back and start reading from where the conversation began, and turn off the "supreme indifference mode". Moving around in circles would take you no where.
My simple argument was that Nawaz, for the shameless charlatan he is, turned to the very same Army for help, which he tried to malign, when cornered, even though Army stayed away from politics in the past 6 years.
Where does Imran Khan being a pal of Musharraf fits in?
If there is not much evidence to put forward your Musharraf-Imran nexus claim, stop giving it as an example. For if you go by this notion, you will have to accommodate PTI's demands of the PM resigning due to massive electoral fraud, of which, according to you, there is not much evidence either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gypsified
It’s all right. To err is human, because guess what? I never talked about conclusive proofs (comprehension problems?). It was you who said there is no evidence ‘whatsoever’ and what did that turn out to be? People would call it a blatant lie but I’ll just say it was a slip of tongue.
|
If you come out of disneyland, you will realize that I never claimed you talked about "conclusive proof"
It was I who asked for conclusive proof of Imran Being Musharraf's pal and it's effect on the current crises.
Yes. Comprehension problem. Sort them out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gypsified
You did, and in a pretty clear language (which you manage once in a while), too bad for you. But of course, it was I who failed to comprehend the whole thing with my “legendary” abilities.
|
Here you are. Well done. Back to what you do best. Lie.
I reiterate, I never asked you to form a link between Musharraf and the current crises. I asked how Imran Khan and Musharraf being pals relates to the current crises.
Please reproduce my statement here if there is any. Mister, well, Liar.
You, as I said, took the discussion to a parallel road. the original discussion was plain and simple. But that's for the general and normal public.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gypsified
You mean they are liars? Well, I understand. Here you go:
“The committee was told that over 400 petitions had been filed with the election tribunals out of which 76 per cent had so far been disposed of.”
http://www.dawn.com/news/1128077/ecp...f-fresh-census
And more:
“the PTI filed 58 petitions challenging the national and provincial assemblies’ seats, out of which 39 petitions (70 percent) have already been decided by the tribunals, in which not a single petition by PTI candidates could successfully substantiate the allegations of rigging. The remaining 19 petitions by the PTI are still pending”
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/opinion...and-imran-khan
And it has also happened in certain cases when the PTI petitioner, instead of appearing before the tribunal on the appointed date, preferred business trips abroad. But of course who’s to blame? The government.
As to your ‘technical grounds’ thingy, you overlooked “not a single petition by PTI candidates could successfully substantiate the allegations of rigging”. And it must also be the “technical grounds” that caused the re-counting (technical? right) and loss of seats by several candidates (including, here’s the funny bit, PTI candidates)? Basically, 10 elected candidates of PML-N faced this fate at the hands of the election tribunal: |
I would have explained the "technical ground" problem, which mainly relates to ink and thumb verification, but going by your recent history, you might need to refer to an English teacher first, and a political Science teacher later, to comprehend. Leave that. Or you can practice a bit using Google. Try if it gives you the search results regarding technical ground problem.
So forget that. Let me put it in the layman's language.
If 60-70 thousand votes are unverifiable in every constituency, how can the tribunal rule out in favor of any particular candidate?
Simple question which the tribunal has not yet answered. You can make up a tom dick and harry story about it, for sure. But the Tirbunal has failed to answer this simple question.
Now since you provided some links regarding discrediting the claim that elections were rigged, let me provide a few which assert otherwise
1:The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) has no record of ballot papers of 139 constituencies, even though more than a year has passed since the National Elections.
Yeah, you read that right. Majority of the candidiates in these 139 constituencies are, not surprisingly, from PML-N, including Nawaz Shareef, shahbaz Shareef, Abid Sher ali and Khwaja saad rafique.
http://www.samaa.tv/pakistan/14-May-...constituencies
2: Fafen, an independent NGO, alleges over 71,000 irregularities in 2013 polls
http://www.dawn.com/news/1105425
3: Dr Shahid Masood discloses the rigging, based on the facts provided by an independent committee
http://www.unewstv.com/14705/fafen-e...ling-the-story
4: Rauf Klasra on rigging
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3SGTeOjfAQ
5: Rauf Klasra once again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Jm2tYuhTcA
6: Justice Fakhuridin admits he resigned because of pressure from Iftikhar Chaudary over election inquiry
http://www.awaztoday.tv/News-Talk-Sh...-Chaudhry.aspx
Some other developments for your viewing pleasure
7: NADRA chief dismissed by Prime Minister after he claimed NADRA has the infrastructure to ensure thumb verification in the elections, and hence, any rigging.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/640871/g...en-reinstated/
8: NADRA chief gets reinstated by the high court, but resigns because of receiving threats for himself and his family. Vote verification issue the main cause.
http://dunyanews.tv/index.php/en/Pak...-Malik-resigns
9: Imran Khan Rigging Allegations prove true :-NA- 68 Sargodha Election
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wgK2SxE2fc
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gypsified
“The author stated that 10 elected parliamentarians of the PML-N have been unseated by the ETs. This is the highest number of decisions against any political party.”
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/nationa...far-from-facts
Interestingly, “Judgments in only two petitions have gone against PTI candidates. Independent candidates are the biggest winners thus far with eight cases in their favour, followed by the PPP at six.” Who suffered the most? The ruling party. Who to blame? The ruling party. Priceless. |
The only thing priceless here is your deductive reasoning. If PML-N has the highest number of people who were un-seated, what does that prove. Think. A bit more. almost there. Bingo. It was the ruling party who was involved in rigging more than any other party. Plain and simple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gypsified
It’s also very amusing that Imran thinks government’s involvement with elections is a sin (about which he fails to present any evidence) but it’s perfectly all right to accuse the government about what the election tribunals have been doing (which is a lot and effecting PML-N the most). I don’t call him clown for nothing, see?
Your ability to ignore facts surpasses even my "legendary" lack of comprehension. With whatever ability of comprehension I can manage, I’ll state them. The parliament did step in (even though election tribunals are independent but you cannot reason with Imran) and offered to form a commission before the march even started. What reason was there to continue? Of course, resignation of the PM and anarchy.
|
Both your personal opinions. I won't comment, as you will take the debate on a whole new planet once again. Glad to know what you think.