Grand Alliance of PML (Nawaz) & Memory Loss!

LAHORE, July 2: The Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) dropped the first hint on Saturday of its readiness to embrace the Muttahida Qaumi Movement in order to forge an anti-PPP alliance when Nawaz Sharif, the party chief, said “we will welcome the MQM into a grand political alliance to rid the nation of the present government”. “The MQM has at last come to the conclusion that the government plays tricks with its allies on every occasion,” Mr Sharif said. “We will welcome all parties in a proposed grand anti-government alliance as it is the need of the hour to rid the nation of this government,” the former prime minister said while talking to reporters after a party meeting in Model Town. Mr Sharif’s statement came amid the buzz in political circles that the Punjab chief minister was likely to meet MQM supremo Altaf Hussain during a week-long visit slated to begin on Sunday. A spokesman for the PML-N, however, scotched such speculations. “No meeting is scheduled between Shahbaz Sharif and Altaf Hussain in London,” the spokesman said. REFERENCE: Nawaz ready to work with Muttahida By Zulqernain Tahir | From the Newspaper July 3, 2011 (2 days ago) http://www.dawn.com/2011/07/03/nawaz-ready-to-work-with-muttahida.html 

Nawaz Sharif "Attacks" MQM.

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHkxpSxlPw8

MQM-PML (N) Revolution, Brigadier (R) Imtiaz & LONDON APC. http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2011/07/mqm-pml-n-revolution-brigadier-r-imtiaz.html  PML - N Operation Cleanup 1992 against MQM & Maulana Fazlur Rehman. http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2011/06/pml-n-operation-cleanup-1992-against.html  Wiki Leaks Memo on MQM & MQM's "Confusion" over AL-QAEDA. http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2011/05/wiki-leaks-memo-on-mqm-mqms-confusion.html  Wiki Leaks Memo on "Karachi Killings"! http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2011/05/wiki-leaks-memo-on-karachi-killings.html

PML(N) Vs MQM Mustafa Kamal On Fire SHAME Politicians

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLDyGq68RQ8


Wasim Akhtar (MQM) Exposes Nawaz Sharif & PML - Nawaz.

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKnb8xy-2yY

ISLAMABAD: The Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) has reacted positively to Pakistan Muslim League-N chief Nawaz Sharif’s statement welcoming it into an ‘opposition alliance’, but has said it is not ready to join any move to topple the government. “We recognise PML-N’s mandate and will definitely cooperate with the party on the opposition benches in parliament, but we do not believe in plans to topple governments to achieve certain political goals,” MQM spokesman Wasay Jalil said while commenting on Mr Sharif’s indirect offer to the party to join an anti-government alliance. Talking to Dawn on Sunday, Mr Jalil said the MQM had not received any formal offer from the PML-N, adding that the media would be informed about the party’s decision whenever such an offer was received. He said the PML-N was the largest opposition party and the MQM was ready to work under it on the opposition benches. REFERENCE: MQM against joining bid to topple govt By Amir Wasim | From the Newspaper Yesterday http://www.dawn.com/2011/07/04/mqm-against-joining-bid-to-topple-govt.html 

Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan [MNA - PML (Nawaz)] always resort to personal attacks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oASxnC30y8

KARACHI, Aug 24 Muttahida Qaumi Movement chief Altaf Hussain has appealed to Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry to constitute a “truth and reconciliation commission” in the light of disclosures made by Lt-Gen (retd) Naseer Akhtar, a former corps commander of Karachi, and Brig Imtiaz Ahmed, a former director-general of the Intelligence Bureau, that the MQM had nothing to do with the “Jinnahpur conspiracy”. Speaking at a press conference through remote video link from London at the Jinnah Ground on Monday, Mr Hussain said that at a talk show aired on a private television channel, the former Karachi corps commander and the former director-general of the intelligence bureau had made it clear that the allegation of the recovery of maps of Jinnahpur from the offices of the MQM in June 1992 was baseless and that the documents were fake. He recalled that Brig Asif Haroon had called journalists from Punjab after the launch of the operation to brief them about the “Jinnahpur conspiracy”, showing them maps of Jinnahpur and other documents found in the offices of MQM. “But on Sunday, Lt-Gen (retd) Naseer Akhtar and Brig (retd) Imtiaz made it clear that it was a false allegation and an attempt to divide the nation,” the MQM chief added. On the basis of the alleged maps of Jinnahpur, action was ordered against the MQM, the Muttahida chief recalled, alleging that 15,000 workers were killed during the operation and its aftermath. Mr Hussain thanked the two former military officials for “speaking the truth about the Jinnahpur conspiracy”, but lamented that it was too late since it cost the MQM heavily. He wondered why then prime minister Nawaz Sharif did not try to stop the operation. Altaf Husain called upon Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry to set up a “truth and reconciliation commission” so that “fact could be distinguished from fiction”.“I can make very harsh comments after the disclosures by two senior former military officials, but I am not doing so for the sake of political harmony. “But Mr Chaudhry (Chief Justice of Pakistan), will it not be appropriate to constitute a truth and reconciliation commission. I leave the decision to you.” “I don`t want confrontation….I want unity and therefore I announce that today I pardon the murderers of my brother and nephew,” Mr Altaf said. The MQM supremo appealed to the Army and the ISI not to pay heed to the propaganda against his party. “We are not traitors….we only want to change the corrupt feudal system in the country. I appeal to the army and the ISI to withdraw old allegations, accept the MQM as a patriotic party and allow it to work across the country.” He also urged the ISI to remove from its archives all documents maligning the MQM. Mr Altaf asked CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry to summon Lt-Gen Naseer Akhtar and Brig Imtiaz to hear their versions on the 1992 operation. He called upon the president, the prime minister and the federal cabinet to “take the nation into confidence” about those “testing times”. A large number of relatives of MQM workers who were killed during the military operation were present at the Jinnah ground. REFERENCE: Retired army officers absolve MQM of Jinnahpur plot: Altaf calls for truth and reconciliation commission By Azfar-ul-Ashfaque August 25, 2009 http://archives.dawn.com/archives/35615 

MQM Hyder Abbas Rivi's Reply to Chaudhry Nisar's statement

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Dr4Ozvk2tc

HYDERABAD, Oct 21 Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz has held Sindh government responsible for recent bloodshed in Karachi and demanded that Sindh assembly should be suspended for a year, government and governor should be dismissed, an interim government should be set up with Chief Justice of Sindh High Court as its head and Karachi should be handed over to Army. PML-N leader and former MNA Sahibzada Shabbir Hassan Ansari said at a news conference here on Thursday that it was the only way out to stop the ongoing blood sport in the metropolis. He supported PPP leader Nabil Ahmed Gabol`s demand for handing over control of Karachi to army. “Karachi economic engine of the country, when it is disturbed the economy of the entire country is disturbed,” he said. He said that scores of innocent people were killed on the Ashura day and shops and property belonging to business community worth billions of rupees were set ablaze. Then, following murder of MQM MPA Raza Hyder, over a 100 innocent lives were put to death and only during last week, more than a 100 people were gunned down but not a single culprit had been arrested so far, he regretted.

Mr Ansari said that the government was only staging farces and announcing promulgation of curfew and search operation on electronic media to give ample time to criminal elements to go underground with their weapons. “Is it not really flabbergasting that the PPP, ANP and MQM, which are themselves “the government”, are blaming each other for the bloodshed,” he asked and wondered whom should the aggrieved families turn to when the government had ceased to exist. He welcomed the decision of Supreme Court on the 18th Amendment and advised President Asif Zardari not to indulge in confrontation with the superior judiciary and its judgement on the NRO in letter and spirit. He said the president should also direct his ministers to be extra careful in their choice of words when they spoke about Nawaz Sharif and other political leaders. Even the illiterate avoided using the language which the PPP ministers were in the habit of using, the PML-N leader said.

Expressing concern over prevailing situation in Balochistan, he stressed the need for a dialogue and warned that use of force would add fuel to the fire. ANP Senior vice-president of the Awami National Party`s Sindh chapter, Haji Asmatullah Khan Mehsud, has said that the Muttahida Qaumi Movement is levelling baseless allegations against the ANP in order to lift its image. He said in a press statement issued on Thursday MQM was opposing military operation but when military operation could be launched in Swat, Bajaur, Malakand and Waziristan against terrorists, why it could not be launched in Karachi. He stressed the need for ridding Karachi of Bhatta and land mafia and demanded that all political parties should support army operation against seemingly unstoppable target killings. He urged Sindh government to take a courageous decision like Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa`s government to use Army`s help in eradicating all mafias and terrorists from Karachi. REFERENCE: PML-N calls for dismissal of Sindh govt, governor Bureau Report October 22, 2010 http://archives.dawn.com/archives/81643 

Speech of Haider Abbas Rizvi Rebuttal of Ch. Nisar in the Parliament - 1 (2009 National Assembly of Pakistan)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYV4CIPrMiU

GOING by the rate at which former operatives from a plethora of military and other agencies have been emerging from the woodwork and spilling the beans, it almost seems as if someone went around spiking their preferred beverages with truth serum in the run-up to the month of fasting. If only it were that simple. Were there is some sort of guarantee that their outpourings consisted of nothing but the truth, it would be possible to applaud the skeletons that have steadily been striding out of all manner of cupboards in recent weeks. Back in the dying years of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev laid considerable store by his policy of glasnost, which was an attempt to fill in the blank pages of his nation`s history. Much of the material that saw the light in those heady days was, of course, already common knowledge outside the USSR. There can be little doubt that there are many blank pages in Pakistan`s history, but the present process of filling them cannot reasonably be compared with glasnost. A crucial reason for this is that invariably the source of the so-called revelations and the motivation behind them is more relevant than the content. The `why` has more value than the `what`, not least because the latter often involves a regurgitation of established facts.

For instance, did anyone seriously doubt that the Islami Jamhoori Ittihad (IJI) was cobbled together by the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) 21 years ago in an attempt to thwart the electoral appeal of the PPP? Surely, the abortive attempt to keep the PPP out of power following the 1988 elections could not have eluded even a casual observer of those shenanigans. And it was followed by efforts to destabilise and, ultimately, abolish the PPP-led government. Is there any element of surprise, then, in the nugget that the ISI distributed largesse among the PPP`s political opponents in the run-up to the next election, or that it was involved in buying loyalties during the effort to push through a motion of no-confidence against the government of Benazir Bhutto? It has also long been rumoured that Osama bin Laden was generous to Benazir`s opponents, and the allegation that he met Nawaz Sharif five times a dozen or so years before 9/11 is of passing interest in the wider context of the Saudi role in Pakistani politics.

Intriguingly, the claim comes from former ISI official Khalid Khawaja, who reportedly heads an NGO called Defence of Human Rights, an organisation that focuses exclusively on those whose rights may have been violated by the US and its allies but can evidently summon up no sympathy for the victims of terrorism. Khawaja was arrested a couple of years ago for distributing `hate material` outside Islamabad`s Lal Masjid, and one thing he decidedly shares in common with the other bean-spillers Рnot least the retired brigadier Imtiaz Ahmed, formerly of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) and ISI Рis that they personally have a great deal to answer for. However, what seems crucial at the moment is the question of who or what has instigated them to start talking openly about misdeeds in which they were intimately involved. Was it an attempt to distract attention from the moderately mysterious minus-one formula that dominated media attention for a while (the one in question being President Asif Ali Zardari)? Or was it primarily intended to bury the demand for former military dictator Pervez Musharraf`s trial? Or were there multiple motivating factors, including an attempt to rehabilitate the reputation of the neo-fascist Muttahida Qaumi Mahaz (MQM) Рwhose leader, settled in London for 17 years, has established a new paradigm in political cowardice? Musharraf, like Altaf Hussain, is domiciled in the British capital, albeit rather more tentatively. The argument that placing him alone in the dock would be a travesty, given that there is a long list of people whose constitutional transgressions and related offences qualify them for prosecution, is certainly not without merit. Tragically, it is more convincing than the idealistic hope that an ex-dictator`s trial and punishment would deter future military takeovers. In fact, it is quite conceivable that the army would feel obliged to flex its muscles in the event of its former chief being made to answer for his crimes. And that may not be a risk worth taking. It is harder to agree with those who see little point in revisiting the recent past, fearing that history`s ghosts could block the road to reconciliation Рbut perhaps forgetting that no meaningful reconciliation can occur without an explicit recognition of what has gone before. This is not to suggest that the current cacophony of probable falsehoods and motivated semi-truths qualifies as an adequate Рor even desirable Рreckoning. At the same time, the plethora of talking heads on private television channels has yielded a few intriguing insights. It was extremely interesting, for instance, to encounter former army chief Mirza Aslam Beg`s ingratiatingly reverent references to the Bhuttos, p̬re et fille, and even an expression of sympathy for al-Zulfikar.

It is well worth remembering, among other things, that while Z.A. Bhutto`s prime ministerial tenure had its redeeming features, it was also the period during which Saudi and ISI interference in Pakistani politics was initiated. It didn`t pay off for the PPP. Unlike their recent gesture towards Musharraf, the Saudis made no effort to save Bhutto`s life. The extent to which they are willing to coddle Nawaz Sharif remains to be seen, but there can be little question that recent indications that the latter would be a considerably more popular choice as helmsman than the incumbent are based on selective amnesia. Meanwhile, as Zardari hits the handout trail yet again, bringing his personal philosophy – that money is the solution to every problem – to bear on affairs of state, it`s worth noting that Pakistan`s poverty reflects not so much the absence (or, rather, incredible disparities) of wealth as the preponderance of stealth and, above all, heavily depleted stores of honesty. REFERENCE: March of the skeletons By Mahir Ali September 16, 2009 http://archives.dawn.com/archives/18894 

Speech of Haider Abbas Rizvi Rebuttal of Ch. Nisar in the Parliament - 2 (2009 National Assembly of Pakistan)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-EoNo-DKn8

WHICH Michael Jackson song was it that had the singer flaunting a set of skeletons on screen? To mark his passing, all the usual suspects in Pakistan have been putting up a not so thrilling show in which bodies are thrown up at will. Many an old grave has been dug up. Little do these performers realise that they may be digging one for themselves. A year after we were released from his grip, Gen Pervez Musharraf remains at the centre of a raging controversy. The PML-N says it wants to take him to court. But by all appearances PML-N`s Musharraf-trial refrain is aimed at further embarrassing a federal government that suffers from a crisis of conscience as well as of action. Parliament and the presidency in this country, with their pomp and glory, have never been empowered to try an army general. The present set-up is no exception to the rule and the presidency can hardly as much as aspire to oblige the PML-N.

The futility of it all doesn`t however prevent politicians from setting up `pro-and anti-Musharraf camps` to take a pot shot or two at each other. The latest in the series is a bare-all exposé by Chaudhry Shujaat Husain. The man has the credentials, for despite having been close to the scene of the crime around the time of the crime he claims innocence. Chaudhry Sahib was there just before Akbar Bugti was killed and there just before the Lal Masjid rebels were taken care of and he says he did all he could as a senior member of the government to avoid the two violent endings. The two instances were evidence enough of Mr Husain`s ability to not be afflicted by the civilian rulers` tendency to commit crimes of passion and then be caught. The same old innocence was on display again last week as he forced open the door to a closet that he had once shared with Mian Nawaz Sharif.

Chaudhry Shujaat took us many years back in history to the moment when a group of men — with political affiliations that were suspect — were brought over from Karachi to Islamabad, were murdered and quietly laid to rest in the Margalla hills. Needless to say this occurred during Nawaz Sharif`s reign and Chaudhry Sahib knows since he was interior minister then. Everyone thought his scoop was designed to jeopardise the `principled stand` that his erstwhile friends at the head of the PML-N had taken against Gen Musharraf. In the event, all he has so far been able to earn with his disclosure are some negative points for the `ever-feuding` politicians. The latest bout began as a clash between the PML-N and the MQM. Soon we had a din of angry voices from Lahore to London. The point to remember is that the MQM got its opportunity to hit out at Mr Sharif courtesy a statement by ex spymaster Brigadier Imtiaz on the bloody 1992 Operation Clean-up that targeted the MQM. It opened a Pandora`s box and various sources have since come up with their versions of the truth, all of which unfailingly cast serious aspersions on the unworthy politicians. The rejection of the politicians is comparatively easier to accomplish, say, during an election. But tougher tasks need our attention. In 1988, the intelligence agencies created the Islami Jamhoori Ittehad to subvert the people`s will.

The old reliable reports have now been given the stamp of confirmation by Brig Imtiaz and a few others. It will be useful to teach the merits of reconciliation to politicians who had sold their souls to the saboteurs long before they were championed as the true guardians of people`s rights and wishes. More significantly, the revelations should start a debate on the ways and means of the `real masters` who have been able to make politicians bend to their dictates. No matter if one set of politicians has to be replaced after having served its utility. So long as the handlers are around, they will not find it difficult to have puppets from among the millions at their disposal. We must try and find out if the current sense of openness is genuine or not and ask the basic question one more time who actually rules us? REFERENCE: Skeletons, skeletons By Asha`ar Rehman August 30, 2009 http://archives.dawn.com/archives/27165 

Speech of Haider Abbas Rizvi Rebuttal of Ch. Nisar in the Parliament - 3 (2009 National Assembly of Pakistan)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8T0ykqmPiI

ISLAMABAD, Sept 4 The Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) has decided to move its international secretariat from London to Dubai, Dawn has learnt. According to sources in the party, the MQM leadership has taken the decision due to logistical reasons as the party`s members and office-bearers have been facing difficulties in obtaining visa for the UK whenever they are called to London for meetings. The sources said that renovation work was under way in the building that would house the party`s new secretariat. The new offices are expected to be operational within three months. According to a source, Mr Hussain will continue to live in London and will travel to Dubai to attend important meetings of the MQM there. Dubai became an important centre for Pakistani politics in 1998 when former prime minister Benazir Bhutto started living there in self-exile. Ms Bhutto regularly convened meetings of her party`s Central Executive Committee and senior leaders in Dubai during the nine-year rule of former president Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf.

The controversial deal between Gen (retd) Musharraf and Ms Bhutto regarding the National Reconciliation Ordinance was also struck in Dubai whereas the first direct meeting between the two took place in Abu Dhabi. The MQM formally established its international secretariat in London in 1995 – three years after its chief Altaf Hussain started living there. Mr Hussain was advised by his party colleagues and members of the Rabita Committee to leave the country immediately after he survived an assassination attempt in December 1991. The MQM chief left the country for Saudi Arabia on his way to London in January 1992 – six months before a military operation was launched against the party during Nawaz Sharif`s first tenure as prime minister. Mr Hussain was in London when the party`s name was changed from “Mohajir Qaumi Movement” to the present “Muttahida Qaumi Movement” in 1997. REFERENCE: MQM plans to move secretariat to Dubai By Amir Wasim September 5, 2010 http://archives.dawn.com/archives/37977

Speech of Haider Abbas Rizvi Rebuttal of Ch. Nisar in the Parliament - 4 (2009 National Assembly of Pakistan)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AjxCGJLeB0

KARACHI Almost every ruling and opposition parties have opposed the Muttahida Qaumi Movement chief Altaf Hussain`s call to `patriotic generals to take action similar to martial law against corrupt politicians`, saying that a civilian set-up must be supported over a military rule. MQM chief Altaf Hussain told his party workers on Sunday that army generals had imposed martial laws in the past and so they could take a similar action again to weed out corrupt politicians and the MQM would support such an act. Every party expressed its concern over the MQM chief`s call. Commenting on Mr Hussain`s speech, a senior leader of the Pakistan People`s Party, Taj Haider, said that “such statements are not welcome”. However, he hastily added that he would not say anything that might affect the working relationship of the PPP and the MQM, which are coalition partner at the centre and in Sindh. “We are following the policy of reconciliation and would continue to pursue it.”

Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) leader Saleem Zia said that his party had a great respect for the country`s armed forces and it was a firm believer that every organisation should play its due role as envisaged in the Constitution. He said that the army was doing a wonderful job in the fight against militancy, it had defended the country from external threats, it had done a good job in the relief and rehabilitation work after the 2005 earthquake and it was doing a good rescue and relief operation amid devastating floods. He said that the intervention of armed forces in politics was not a good thing and earlier experiences had shown that the country suffered a lot during military rules. He said that the MQM was a partner in the general Musharraf-led government, which was almost like a martial law, and as to why it did not ask the then military ruler to weed out corruption.

He said that corruption was rampant in the country in every segment of the society, but it was inappropriate to target just politicians. He said that his party would never support army intervention to remove a civilian set up. Ghaus Bakhsh Mahar of the Pakistan Muslim League (Q) said that though the current civilian set up had given worst governance and corruption was rampant, yet he would not support the army intervention to disrupt the civilian set up. He said that he believed that even worst of the democratic governments was better than the best of dictatorships.

He said that the present civilian government had failed miserably as it was taking important national decisions just for personal gains. Amin Khattak of the Awami National Party said that his party would not support martial law. He said that the past experience showed that the country had suffered greatly under martial laws.

He said that heroin and gun culture was the product/gifts of the past martial laws. He said that during the military rules, sectarian and ethnic organizations were created to divide the political forces. He said that even a bad democratic government was better than a good martial law. A leader of the Pakistan Muslim League (Functional), Jam Madad Ali, said that martial law is not a good form of government and he always preferred democracy. He said that he would not support martial law. However, he said that effective steps should be taken to check the menace of corruption. He said he would support any action taken to control corruption but under a civilian set up. He said that people of the country did not like martial laws and had always protested against the dictatorial regimes. Jamiat Ulema Islam (F) leader Qari Usman said that their party could not support martial law as the pervious experiences had shown that the country had suffered a great deal under the army rules. He said that to root out corruption there were proper anti-corruption laws the only thing missing was their proper implementation. He said his party would not support any new martial law. Meanwhile, despite repeated attempts, this reporter could not able to contact any leader of the Jamaat-i-Islami to get their viewpoint. REFERENCE: Altaf`s remarks about martial law criticised by most parties August 23, 2010 http://archives.dawn.com/archives/106653

Unparliamentary & Extremely Prejudiced Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan.

The report about the allotment of plots was submitted by the housing ministry after the Public Accounts Committee chairman Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan had issued directives to furnish a list of all those who were allotted plots in Islamabad since 1996. Interestingly, Nisar did not seek a list of such allotments from 1991 when Nawaz Sharif, his party’s chief, had first become the prime minister. He also did not direct the ministry of defence to submit a list of land allotted to military generals who have been regularly getting agricultural land in the fertile areas of the country, the Seraiki region in particular, at a rate of under Rs180 per acre. One official was of the opinion that Nisar did not issue such instructions as he has a military background himself. His father was recruited during the colonial period and his brother Lt. Gen. Iftikhar Ali Khan served as defence secretary during Sharif’s government. REFERENCE: Myth busted: Chief justice also got a plot By Rauf Klasra Published: November 25, 2010 http://tribune.com.pk/story/81570/myth-busted-chief-justice-also-got-a-plot/

PML Nawaz and Chaudry Nisar Lashed by Kamran Khan - (See before you speak)

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqspsUjxo2I&feature=related

Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan and some other party members were in favour of Pervaiz Musharaf because Musharaf has an ugly face and so he would not want to come on TV. And if a person do not want to come on TV then he will not impose Martial Law. And Nawaz Sharif went with the 2nd choice. Jang Oct 2010 Hamid Mir – http://www.pinditube.com/2010/10/ch-nisar-ali-khan-and-some-other-party-members-supported-musharraf-because-he-looks-ugly/

MQM Hyder Abbas Rivi's Reply to Chaudhry Nisar's statement

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Dr4Ozvk2tc



PML-N leader and Leader of Opposition in the National Assembly, Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan. – File Photo ISLAMABAD: PML-N leader and Leader of Opposition in the National Assembly, Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, has upped the ante in his party’s confrontation with the ruling PPP and accused President Asif Ali Zardari of giving a ‘provincial colour’ to the Supreme Court verdict on the appointment of Justice (retd) Syed Deedar Hussain Shah as chairman of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB).

Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan [MNA - PML (Nawaz)] always resort to personal attacks

Addressing a news conference at the Punjab House on Sunday, Chaudhry Nisar said he was yet to receive the much-talked about letter from Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani regarding reappointment of Justice Deedar Shah as NAB chairman. He said the letter written to him by the prime minister on the president’s advice had reached everywhere through the media, but not to the person it was addressed to. He criticised the government for its hasty decision of reappointing Deedar Shah and writing the letter to him without waiting for the detailed judgment. He hinted that he might wait for the detailed verdict before responding to the letter if he received it. “I have not decided yet. But of course, my mind says that before making any response, I should first see reasons for which the court has declared the appointment of a person illegal.” The Supreme Court in its March 10 short order on the petition of Chaudhry Nisar annulled the appointment. The verdict by a three-judge bench, with detailed reasons the court said would be issued later, required the NAB chairman, a former judge of the Supreme Court, to immediately leave the office he had assumed five months earlier after another legal row in which the court had ordered removal of his predecessor.

Haider Abbas Rizvi (MQM) Rebuttal to Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan (PML - N) - Part 1

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6XuNg2XduE

Haider Abbas Rizvi (MQM) Rebuttal to Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan (PML - N) - Part 2

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFPJgYIj95c&feature=related

Chaudhry Nisar had challenged the appointment on the ground that the prime minister had not met the constitutional requirement of holding mandatory consultation with him. Soon after the court verdict, PPP’s Sindh chapter gave a call for strike in the province and violence erupted in different areas of Karachi, causing losses of life and damage to vehicles. Chaudhry Nisar held President Zardari responsible for the killings in Karachi and alleged that he had put the whole country, the government and his own party at stake by not accepting the verdict. The opposition leader said the reaction showed by the PPP immediately after the court’s decision had proved his assertion that Deedar Shah was a Jiyala (diehard PPP activist). “Whenever President Zardari finds himself in trouble, he starts wearing Sindhi cap and Ajrak (traditional shawl). On the other hand, when the people of his province were looking for help during the recent floods, he was visiting his palaces in the UK and France,” he said, accusing the president of fanning ‘provincialism’.

Haider Abbas Rizvi (MQM) Rebuttal to Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan (PML - N) - Part 3

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPwC4dJ2FNU&feature=related

Haider Abbas Rizvi (MQM) Rebuttal to Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan (PML - N) - Part 4

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv7sLg1rjVE&feature=related

“We are against President Zardari not because he is a Sindhi but because of his misdeeds,” he said, adding that his party had no prejudice against anyone despite the fact that three of the four top constitutional offices were being held by people from Sindh — the president, the Senate chairman and the National Assembly speaker. Chaudhry Nisar warned President Zardari that the PML-N could create problems for him when he would come to parliament to meet a constitutional requirement of addressing a joint session of both houses in a few days. “If the government does not change its attitude, we will not let it run parliament smoothly,” he warned. “If someone will violate the law, parliament will react to it.” “The wrong and outdated policies being pursued by the Presidency have put the government on the death bed and for the past seven days the PPP has been begging before the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) to provide it oxygen,” he said.

Kamran Khan Exposes Pakistan Army Corruption (26 Aug 2009) - Part - 1

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tz8mZ4941Nc

Kamran Khan Exposes Pakistan Army Corruption (26 Aug 2009) - Part - 2

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuObd2mh_9g&feature=related

Chaudhry Nisar was also critical of President Zardari’s move to approach the PML-Q. “President Zardari should sit with Bilawal and Bakhtawar and seek an apology from the nation and accept their mistake of calling the party ‘qatil League’,” he said. “After Musharraf’s departure, Asif Zardari is the new face of disaster for the country,” he said, alleging that the president had become a threat to democracy, Constitution and rule of law. He also criticised Law Minister Babar Awan’s role in the government and the ruling party and challenged his loyalty to the PPP.

Replying to a question, he denied that Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif had called for involving the army and judiciary in the political process. He claimed that a statement by the chief minister had been presented out of context and said the PML-N was against army’s involvement in politics. He said the Punjab chief minister’s statement actually meant that both the army and the judiciary would also have to hold self-accountability. REFERENCE: Nisar lashes out at Zardari, accuses him of provincialism By Amir Wasim | From the Newspaper (10 hours ago) Today http://www.dawn.com/2011/03/14/nisar-lashes-out-at-zardari-accuses-him-of-provincialism.html

Extremely Prejudiced Chaudhry Nisar, MQM and PCO.

Where many people term the appointment of General Pervez Musharraf as army chief in 1998 a big blunder by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif a top PML-N leader now claims that Musharraf was the best option available. ‘The prime minister made the final decision. I did support Musharraf to become the Chief of Army Staff… But the decision was based purely on merit given his professional track record,’ PML-N central leader Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, told DawnNews, in an interview. Critics blamed Chaudhry Nisar and his brother Lt Gen (r) Iftikhar Ali Khan, the then defence secretary, for persuading Nawaz Sharif to appoint General Musharraf as army chief. But Chaudhry Nisar, who is also the Opposition Leader in the National Assembly nowadays, did not have any regrets of favouring General Musharraf to the top slot. Asked whether the military coup of October 1999 was the result of that bad judgement, he observed they supported Musharraf to become the army chief not the Chief Martial Law Administrator.Chaudhry Nisar also justified the appointment of General Musharraf as Chairman Joint Chief of Staff Committee after the Kargil fiasco.He asserted the decision to appoint General Musharraf as chairman of the JCSC was made to boost the moral of the armed forces.He said the PML-N government did not want to act against the generals, who masterminded and executed Kargil operation. Not only General Pervez Musharraf himself, but many former close aides of Nawaz Sharif including Chaudhry Shujaat and Mushahid Hussain, already stated that Kargil operation was conducted with full consent of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.Chaudhry Nisar did not deny the ambition of attaining the top political office of the prime minister. ‘When you are in politics then you struggle. And whatever comes you take it. You take the good with bad. As and when situation arises you face it,’ he observed, when asked whether or not he wants to become the prime minister. He said whatever the case may be he would not make any categorical observation while sitting in a television interview. Reference: Sunday, April 26, 2009, 16:28 http://www.pakistanviews.com/politics/nisar-says-he-backed-musharraf-s-appointment.html

Speech of Haider Abbas Rizvi (MQM) Rebuttal to Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan in the Parliament 1

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYV4CIPrMiU

The Chief of Army Staff, General Asif Nawaz had begun to feel upset at many of Sharif's moves, most significant of them being his attempts to create rifts within the Army. Chaudhry Nisar Ahmad and Brig. Imtiaz, the former ISI chief, were even accused by the late General of threatening to turn him into another Gul Hasan, the army chief who was sacked by Z.A. Bhutto and bundled into a car by Ghulam Mustafa Khar and taken to Lahore by road. It is said that just when General Mirza Aslam Beg was about to topple Nawaz Sharif at the fag end of his tenure in 1991, President Ghulam Ishaq Khan agreed to name General Asif Nawaz as the new COAS, three months before he was to take over. Just when General Asif Nawaz was getting seriously worried about the Nawaz Sharif government, he died quite suddenly in January, 1993 Reference: Saga of intrigue and deceit by Shaheen Shebai - Dawn - 27.5.1993 / ISLAMIC PAKISTAN: ILLUSIONS & REALITY By Abdus Sattar Ghazali [Correction: Brigadier Imtiaz had never been ISI Chief rather he was IB Chief during Nawaz Sharif's First Government]

Speech of Haider Abbas Rizvi (MQM) Rebuttal to Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan in the Parliament 2

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-EoNo-DKn8&feature=related

ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Muslim League-N has urged the army to clarify its position on the appeal made by MQM chief Altaf Hussain to ‘patriotic generals’ to take ‘martial law-like action against corrupt politicians’. “Ask ISPR (army’s public relations department) to make a comment on it. I personally believe that the army should present its viewpoint,” Chaudhry Nisar, Leader of Opposition in National Assembly, said in reply to a question at a press conference on Saturday. Chaudhry Nisar said it would be in the interest of the army if it stayed away from politics. “Please, let the army do its job. It is in the interest of the army, country and all institutions as Pakistan’s future lies in democracy. Today, when they (army) have returned to their original work, don’t distract them.” The opposition leader said the federal government’s silence, too, was surprising considering that the Muttahida chief was actually talking about the rulers’ corruption. The PML-N has already submitted a privilege motion to the National Assembly secretariat in condemnation of Mr Hussain’s remarks. Like the MQM, he added, the PML-N was concerned over corruption, but the party favoured accountability through parliament. Chaudhry Nisar accused the Muttahida chief of “trying to divide the army and make it controversial” at a time when soldiers were busy in the war against terrorism.

In the past, Chaudhry Nisar recalled, the MQM was always critical of Rangers and the army’s role and raised “anti-army slogans” when Gen Asif Nawaz, Gen Jehangir Karamat and Gen Waheed Kakar were army chiefs. “However, when Gen Musharraf hid their misdeeds, the army became dear to the MQM,” he said. The opposition leader criticised the MQM for keeping silent when “its favourite army chief (an allusion to Gen Musharraf) made those people minister who had been facing corruption charges and were under the custody of National Accountability Bureau which was under the total control of the army”. “Why did you not question Gen Musharraf when he released NAB-affected people from jails and made them your colleagues in the cabinet?” the PML-N leader asked. Commenting on Mr Hussain’s controversial remarks, the PML-N leader reminded the MQM leadership that it was the army that had ‘exposed its style of politics based on murder and extortion”. He threatened to present the record of army about the MQM in parliament if it did not stop personal attacks on the PML-N leadership. REFERENCE: PML-N seeks army, govt’s response to MQM remarks By Amir Wasim Sunday, 29 Aug, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/front-page/pmln-seeks-army,-govts-response-to-remarks-980

Speech of Haider Abbas Rizvi (MQM) Rebuttal to Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan in the Parliament 3 [Article 6 as explained by Mr Haider Abbas Rizvi in National Assembly. He explains that “abettors” are also guilty of Treason]

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8T0ykqmPiI&feature=related

On Thursday, February 05, 2009; 2:44 AM….In the Urdu daily Jang of February 2, 2009 there was a column titled “Would Altaf Hussain participate in long march ?”, by the famous journalist Mr. Ansar Abbasi known for his research and investigative journalism. This column was a direct response to MQM’s Quaid Mr. Altaf Hussain’s address to MQM’s rabita committee in London on Jan 27, 2009. During the address Mr. Altaf Hussain put a simple question to Mr. Nawaz Shareef vis-à-vis PCO judges. that “what does the Charter of democracy’s article 3, clause (a) & (b) says about those judges who took oath under the PCO and if Mian sahib can answer this question then MQM too would diligently work with them towards the enforcement of Charter of Democracy.”. But in case Mian Nawaz fails to answer the question then it will be morally binding on him and an obligation to reconsider his decision to participate in long march. Principally & professionally speaking the answer should have come from Mian Nawaz Shareef. Alas it never came; nevertheless Mr. Ansar Abbasi took upon himself to issue a rejoinder. Peoples Party’s Shaheed Chairperson Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto and Mian Nawaz Shareef put their signatures on the Charter of Democracy (COD) comprising of 7 pages, 4 important topics and 36 articles in London on May, 14, 2006. But here we will only talk about the relevant points brought up by Mr. Ansar Abbasi, explained and deliberated upon in the aforementioned column. Mr. Abbasi says that COD’s article 3(a) explains the procedure for appointment of new judges and that Article 3(b) addresses the already appointed judges of higher courts with relevance to their oath taken under PCO.

Indeed this is true that Article 3 (b) addresses the oath taken by superior courts judges under the PCO and this is exactly said in the COD that “No judge shall take oath under PCO and nor shall he take any oath whose language stands at odds with the 1973 constitution’s defined language for oath of judges”.

Let’s read the exact text of the relevant Article from the COD. Under Article 3(a) it says “The recommendations for appointment of judges to superior judiciary shall be formulated through a commission, which shall comprise of the following: (i). The chairman shall be a chief justice, who has never previously taken oath under the PCO.”

Ansar Abbasi in his column translates it as “The recommendations for the appointment of judges for the superior courts shall be undertaken through a Commission. This commission will comprise of following individuals.

1) The Commission’s chairman shall be a Chief Justice, who has never previously taken oath under PCO”. Mr. Ansar Abbasi himself mentions that “according to this Article Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry (deposed) Chief Justice cannot become the chairman of this commission which has been entrusted with the task of making recommendations for the appointment of new judges. And for this any chief justice who in past did not take oath under PCO stands eligible to become chairman of this commission”. Our question to Mr. Ansar Abbasi when he openly admits that according to COD’s Article 3(a) Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry (deposed) CJ cannot become chairman of the commission that will make recommendations for the appointment of judges to superior courts and is not eligible for the task then how can he according to Article 3(a) be eligible to hold the highest and honorable office of the superior court? Knowing this reality in its totality and fully well would it be right and legal to demand his restoration?

A very amusing point that MR Ansar Abbasi brings forth with regards to Article 3(a) in his column; it says “this sub-article has nothing to do with the current judges and that few people according to a well thought of plan are interpreting Article 3(a) in such a way so as to make the restoration of Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry controversial and create confusion in common people”. But after explaining Article 3(a) he says “the authors of COD after much thought did not use the word “The Chief Justice” of Pakistan but used “a chief justice” since they knew that the chief justice of that time and those who will follow as chief justice will be those who took oath under the 2001 PCO”.

Quite strikingly Mr. Abbasi accepted the fact that in May 2006 this particular Article in the COD was specially included for the chief justice in office at that time and his brother justices who had taken oath under PCO so that Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry and other justices who took oath under General Pervez Musharraf’s PCO will stand disqualified for appointment as superior court judges. Moreover this is absolutely true that on May 14, 2006 when Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Shaheed and Mian Nawaz Shareef signed the COD, both the leaders had no clue and nor did the senior leadership of two parties knew anything or for that matter the leaders of lawyers movement had any idea that on march 9 a reference would be filed against Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry the sitting chief justice of Pakistan, that on November 3 General Musharraf would again impose emergency in the country and that judges would again be required by him to take new oaths under the PCO. As for making Mr. Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry controversial, it is those parties who are dragging him into political rallies and processions that are to be blamed. As a justice Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry deserves the respect and protocol that comes with the office. Sadly & with due respect the chief justices and judges of superior courts are not only and strictly prohibited from public appearances, attending or endorsing political rallies and agendas, but even barred from attending private functions of such nature. But the honorable justice thought it right to go ahead with attending political rallies and processions and let the exalted office of chief justice go to the street and let himself become a spectacle on top of being controversial.

PML (N) leadership came up with the ludicrous argument that PCO’s mention in the COD is with reference to those judges who took oath on November 3, 2007. The question is that when the signatures were being put on charter of democracy on May 14, 2006 it was way before November 3, 2007, then whether PML (N) leadership got the premonition that on November 3, 2007 judges will take oath under the PCO? As per Ansar Abbasi if Article 3(a) of COD has no relevance with current judges or of any consequence to them then who are these particular PCO judges mentioned in the COD, since before January 2000 the PCO came in General Zia-ul-Haq’s martial law in 1977 and none of those PCO judges from General Zia’s time were present in the judiciary of 2007. Accordingly it proves that in the COD announced on May 14, 2006 the very mention of PCO refers to the PCO of General Musharraf introduced in January 2000 and those who took oath on it.

The fact is that in the COD the issue of judges taking oath under PCO has been dealt with utmost seriousness and in Article 3(a) clause (2) with reference to procedure for appointment of judges in superior courts that it clearly says commission that makes recommendations for the appointment of judges, its members shall be Provincial High Court Chief Justices who have never taken oath under PCO. In case the criteria are not met then it will be senior most judges who will be members of the commission and those who have never taken oath under PCO. If in January 2000 there had been no PCO by General Musharraf and Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and his brother justices not taken oath under the PCO and provided constitutional protection to General Musharraf’s dictatorship, then it is our firm belief that in COD the mention of judges who took oath under PCO and their appointment would not have been mentioned as an Article in order to disqualify them. But on the contrary this would not have been an issue at all.

Mian Nawaz Shareef, Qazi Husaain Ahmed, Imran Khan and their like minded political leaders, lawyers, Ansar Abbasi and others of same thought look down on the current Supreme Court Chief Justice Mr. Abdul Hameed Dogar and judges appointed under the PCO after the emergency of November 3, 2007 and don’t spare a moment in maligning them and consider them unconstitutional. Mian Nawaz Sharif has taken the extreme position of not recognizing them and has not hesitated in using derogatory and uncouth language such as “anti-state elements”, “traitors” and ”anti-Pakistan” and keeps using it in public. We have one question to all the above mentioned personalities and with all due respect we ask if Mr. Chief Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar and other judges taking oath under PCO on November 3, 2007 in their eyes was a serious and punishable crime then Mr. Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s oath on January 4, 2000 under General Musharraf’s first PCO too falls in the category of a serious and punishable crime. Then why do they present this one judge who committed the same unconstitutional act as a hero and the other as a traitor? Was General Musharraf’s PCO in 2000 was correct and in accordance with the constitution of Pakistan? If this is true then the Chief Justice of that time Mr. Saeed-uz-Zaman Siddiqui, Justice Nasir Aslam Zahid, Justice Wajeehuddin Ahmed, Justice Kamal Mansoor Alam, Justice Mamoon Kazi, and Justice Khalil-ur-Rahman would not have said no to taking oath under PCO and would not have said that we have already taken oath under the constitution of Pakistan and therefore we will not take a second oath under the PCO. These were the true heroes of judiciary those who demonstrated strength of character and were brave enough to not to take oath under PCO and instead submitted their resignations. This most important chapter in Pakistan’s legal history went unnoticed by Mian Nawaz Shareef and by the leadership of PML (N) who are always at the forefront of all kinds of foul and malicious attacks on Supreme Court. Rather they never came out on streets at that time, nor protested or bothered to become champions of judiciary. Nor did the lawyers who are ardently campaigning for restoration of deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and equate it with freedom of judiciary ever bothered to come out at that time and launch protests. Neither did Mr. Ansar Abbasi custodian of the pen and freedom of expression bothered to come out and lodge angry protests and columns. The sad irony is that lawyers and those political leaders who are at the forefront of long marches, waving angry fists and raging in fury never bothered to come out for Chief Justice of that time Mr. Saeed-uz-Zaman Siddiqui, Justice Nasir Aslam Zahid, Justice Wajeehuddin Ahmed, Justice Kamal Mansoor Alam, Justice Mamoon Kazi, and Justice Khalil-ur-Rahman. Not even a mild protest or statement from these lawyers was registered or launched in favor of these true heroes of judiciary. Why this dual approach and where was the civil society then? And what were the prominent members of ex-servicemen’s society doing at that time or were they hiding in some hole? Where was their sense of democracy at that time? Had Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry taken the honorable and brave step of siding with the judges who refused to take oath under General Musharraf’s PCO in 2000 then MQM too would have been at his side, as MQM’s demand and stand is principled, MQM questions as to why is only the restoration of the Nov 2 2007 judges being demanded & why not the judges who refused to take oath under PCO in 2000 and are true heroes who stood up like true men and should all be restored.

MQM strictly adheres to the principled stand that if Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s taking oath in 2000 under General Musharraf’s PCO is acceptable and correct according to Ansar Abbasi and his confidantes and like-minded then how is that judges who took oath on November 3, 2007 under General Musharraf’s second PCO could be illegal ? If one judge who took oath under one PCO is judiciary’s hero, protector and flag bearer of the constitution and considered champion of law then how is it so that another judge who took oath under second PCO can be declared as the villain of judiciary ? and one who abrogated constitution ? If the oath taken on November 3, 2007 by judges was wrong then how is that oath taken earlier in 2000 under the first PCO by General Musharraf by justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was legit and right in the eyes of law ? Asking to restore judges appointed under the first PCO and taking out long marches in their support and when it comes to judges who took oath under second PCO showing utter and abject disregard , calling them as unconstitutional and demanding for them to be removed is nothing short of blatant dichotomy in the character and logic of those who are espousing Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s restoration. If the PCO of January 2000 was right and legit then how that is the PCO of November 3 2007 was wrong and illegal? If the second PCO was wrong and illegal then how can the first PCO be declared as right and legit?

Ansar Abbasi and his like minded political and religious leadership, members of legal community curse and accuse General Musharraf for breaking the constitution, twice introducing PCO, keeping both President & Army Chief offices, fighting elections in uniform and distorting the constitution of the country. Alongside they also demand the restoration of the judiciary of November 2, 2007. Basically they want the restoration of the judiciary whose Chief Justice was Iftikhar Chaudhry. For those with short memories let me remind them with great respect that General Musharraf’s takeover on October 12 1999 and his non-democratic step and his chief executive’s position was validated under doctrine of necessity by whom? In 2000 General Musharraf was allowed to postpone elections for two years by whom? Again in 2002 and in 2005 General Musharraf had both the offices of Chief of Army Staff as well as President and a constitutional writ that was filed against it in Supreme Court was rejected by whom?

Yet again on September 28th 2007 who gave permission to General Musharraf to fight elections in uniform? Was it the Dogar Judiciary as cynically put by Nawaz Shareef or was it the judiciary of November 2, 2007 that rejected the constitutional writs against General Musharraf regarding his Chief of Army Staff uniform, these writs according to Article 184(3) were declared as non maintainable and rejected by whom?

If Mr. Ansar Abbasi and his like minded friends and cronies call General Musharraf a dictator and usurper then who gave sanctuary and constitutional protection to this dictator’s extra-constitutional steps?

In due consideration and full acknowledgement of these facts and in light of this evidence Mr. Ansar Abbasi should sincerely ponder and seriously reflect as to whom is the true violator of the Charter of Democracy? Whether it is MQM or was it Nawaz Shareef and his political allies and confidantes who in demanding the restoration of PCO judges are standing accused of violating their own charter of democracy? If Ansar Abbasi and his confidantes and like minded political friends think and view the COD as that sacrosanct document that if its is not practiced then the entire judiciary, parliamentary system and democracy can be declared as non constitutional and can lead to the turning of tables on democracy and its lynching then principled approach and scruples tell us that if one has faith in COD then one should not talk of restoration of an individual who took oath under a dictator’s PCO, someone who provided full protection to the dictators extra constitutional transgressions. And if one only wants to talk out loud on the COD and not to practice it in spirit , then those who talk out the loudest on the COD should instead of long march go to the Constitution Avenue in Islamabad and burn this COD in the presence of public and in their court and to stop fooling people and pray for their forgiveness.

Would Mr. Ansar Abbasi exhibit moral courage to seek nation’s forgiveness for supporting Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry a person who took oath under General Musharraf’s PCO, a person who provided constitutional protection on many occasions to General Musharraf’s extra-constitutional steps? MQM’s leader Mr. Altaf Hussain sacrificed his party’s interest in lieu of the sensitive national security situation, the perils that democracy is facing today and for its survival in Pakistan. But is that what Mr. Ansar Abbasi would like to see that we put the entire country at stake for one person’s ego arrogance and his employment? Would MR Ansar Abbasi like to sacrifice the entire country, throw democracy in tailspin and put it to the torment of long marches, shutter-down strikes, chaos and lawlessness in these perilous times? Is MR Ansar Abbasi ready to back a long march and sit-downs that aims to destabilize the elected parliaments and to rock democracy’s boat and only to lead to have it trampled under some new dictator’s boots? Mr. Ansar Abbasi and his confidantes and like minded friends will for the sake of democracy have to select between an individual and our country’s democratic system. Is Mr. Abbasi he ready to do it? REFERENCE: A Riposte to Ansar Abbasi By Mustafa Azizabadi Member – Central Rabita Committee & In charge Central Media cell. MQM http://www.mqm.org/English-News/feb-2009/azizabadi-article07-02-09.htm

Speech of Haider Abbas Rizvi (MQM) Rebuttal to Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan in the Parliament 4

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AjxCGJLeB0&feature=related

Opposition leader in the National Assembly Chaudhry Nisar said that former President Pervez Musharraf covered up the misdeeds of MQM’s Chief Altaf Hussain. While addressing a press conference in Islamabad, Ch. Nisar alleged that MQM’s 25 year politics revolves around intelligence agencies. Chaudhry Nisar criticized Altaf Hussain and said that a British passport holder should not give lessons of sympathy for Pakistan. He said that whatever happens in Pakistan and how grim the situation remains, Altaf does not leave his million pounds home in London. He asked that why did Altaf Hussain not oppose General Musharraf during his military rule? Musharraf was his favourite ruler. REFERENCE: Why didn’t Altaf oppose Musharraf?’ asks Ch. Nisar ISLAMABAD - 28th August 2010 By Umair Anwar http://www.aaj.tv/2010/08/why-didnt-altaf-oppose-musharraf-questions-ch-nisar/

Addressing a press conference here on Monday, Chaudhry Nisar whose party was in the forefront of the movement for restoration of deposed judges, including Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, also challenged the judiciary to take cognisance of the statement of MQM chief Altaf Hussain urging army generals to take “martial law-like action” against corrupt politicians. “You always remain in search of issues to take suo motu notices. Now take action because a person has openly talked about abrogation of the Constitution in broad daylight,” the PML-N leader said, seemingly unhappy with the judiciary for some reasons as he did not explain under which law the judiciary could initiate such an action merely on the basis of a statement. He announced that his party had decided to move a privilege motion on the issue and termed the MQM chief’s statement “part of a well-designed and well-orchestrated strategy”. Nisar blames judiciary for fake degree chaos By Amir Wasim Tuesday, 24 Aug, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/national/nisar-blames-judiciary-for-fake-degree-chaos-480