Cynical leaders of the "free" world

[mahnmut]

Musharraf declared state of emergency in Pakistan, in order to "fight terrorism". Dissident leader Benazir Bhutto is effectively under home arrest, her house blocked by fence and concrete blocks, and surrounded by police. No demonstrations are allowed on the streets of Pakistan.

Meanwhile, Bush and his new puppy Sarkozy issued calls for Musharraf to proceed with the planned elections in Pakistan, and quit his chief-of-military position.

Now, isn't it ironic? Both presidents are simultaneously the political heads of their respective states, and chief of military. Their Constitutions say so. But then, didn't Bush previously say that the US Constitution is "just a piece of paper" for him?

The even more ironic thing is, Bush would gladly have used the terrorism "threat" again to cut even more of his citizens' civil rights. Including the declaration of a state of emergency in US, "if need be" (in case something really extreme like 9-11 happens). But of course, these are the presidents of two huge powers, and they can tell Musharraf whatever they want, even if they have to ignore the hypocricy of their own words.

Comments

[tvuutietyle24.livejournal.com]

I see another hypocrisy: the media are quick to denounce the situation in Pakistan but nothing about Venezuela?

Does it mean that being a marxist authoritarian president is more acceptable than abuses from a right-wing leader? Sadly, it sounds so.

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

Dont worry, VNZ is also on the shortlist.
Just, Pakistan is a bit more urgent. Because of the nukes. Question is, who's gonna hold the briefcase with the launch codes?
Venezuela can wait, but not for too long.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

I don't see a problem for any global superpower to deal with both Pakistan and Venezuela. I think the US have other plans about Venezuela.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

It sounds so but it isn't so. It's a question of priorities. Noone cares who is marxist and who is right-wing. The geopolitical interests are above all.

[xvfui.livejournal.com]

And maybe b/c, quite frankly SA isn't a strategic threat to world security.And I think we've pretty well disproven the theory that South American and Latin American countries are going to be the staging ground for the communist assault on America.

The threat, then, is what, exactly? He has our oil? It isn't on our soil. it isn't ours.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

...which is the main problem. ;-)

[xvfui.livejournal.com]

Ah, of course, it's the MEDIA's fault. Congratulations on excellent use of the straw man. Nicely played.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

The Media is the "fourth power" in society. It's a factor too, in shaping the public opinion. Which itself is not a unsignificant factor either.

[nairiporter.livejournal.com]

The western media is forgetting that Pakistan ruled by Musharaf, even a dictator Musharaf, is far more acceptable to the west than a Pakistan ruled by the Talibans. I also want Bhutto to rule Pakistan, even a corrupt Bhutto. But in reality she cannot hold the country in order for long against the Talibans.