White House has asked President Musharraf to quit the army office before he is sworn in as the presi

[rodeodance]

Source: Jang.com

White House asks Musharraf to quit army office before presidency
Updated at 2250 PST
WASHINGTON: White House has asked President Musharraf to quit the army office before he is sworn in as the president.

http://thenews.jang.com.pk/updates.asp?id=31613

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said, "The United States is deeply disturbed by reports."

"A state of emergency would be a sharp setback for Pakistani democracy and takes Pakistan off the path toward civilian rule. President Musharraf has stated repeatedly that he will step down as chief of army staff before re-taking the presidential oath of office and has promised to hold elections by Jan. 15. We expect him to uphold these commitments and urge him to do so immediately."

The state of emergency complicates what was already, in the view of U.S. officials, a complicated relationship.

Read more: http://thenews.jang.com.pk/updates.asp?id=31613

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. Bush should be more worried about Pakistan which HAS nuclear weapons

I don't think the lid can be kept on for much longer

[LakeSamish706]

3. I think that is exactly what Bush wants... Someone to get hold of Pakistan's Nukes...

and use one... They will then try to find a convenient way of blaming it on Iran and presto..... Look out below.

[truthisfreedom]

2. It's as if bushco WANTS the world to explode into chaos.

I wonder why they'd want that.

[AlinPA]

5. Bush** and followers want Jesus to come back during the end times.

[BeHereNow]

11. It's part of the neocon ideology- destroy to re-build.

And the human cost is considered worth the price.
No, really.
That is what they believe.

BHN

[nightrider767]

4. Biden For President

WHo's the one who saw this coming?

Joe Biden baby!

As for Bush, what difference does it make if Musharif wears a military uniform or not. He's still a dictator.

[struggle4progress]

6. Canada Condemns Imposition of Emergency Rule in Pakistan

November 3, 2007
No. 153

The Honourable Maxime Bernier, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the following statement on the imposition of emergency rule in Pakistan:

“Canada condemns the imposition of emergency rule in Pakistan. We are deeply concerned about this development and urge the government of Pakistan to cancel the state of emergency and the new provisional constitutional order immediately ...

http://news.gc.ca/web/view/en/index.jsp?articleid=358599&categoryid=1&category=News+Releases

[struggle4progress]

7. Benazir Bhutto condemns emergency

Associated Press
Sunday, November 4, 2007 (Karachi)

Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto returned to Pakistan late Saturday following a decision by the government to impose a state of emergency and decried the move as tantamount to dictatorship ...

Bhutto said she agreed with Musharraf that their nation - torn by increasing political turmoil and violence at the hands of Islamic insurgents - was in grave danger of anarchy. But she said dictatorship was not the answer.

''I agree with him that we are facing a political crisis, but believe the problem is dictatorship, I don't believe the solution is dictatorship. We had dictatorship, the situation has got worse,'' she said ...

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20070031763&ch=11/4/2007%201:21:00%20AM

[struggle4progress]

8. Britain "gravely concerned"

Britain is "gravely concerned" at Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf's declaration of a state of emergency and urged him to act within the constitution, Foreign Secretary David Miliband said Saturday.

Britain recognised the threats to peace and security in Pakistan, but its future lay in "harnessing the power of democracy and the rule of law to achieve the goals of stability, development and countering terrorism"," he said.

"I am gravely concerned by the measures adopted today, which will take Pakistan further from these goals," he said in a statement issued by his office ...

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/story.html?id=341f402b-071b-4b83-9254-fc112e73ca3c

[struggle4progress]

9. Sweden loses contact with embassy in Pakistan

Published: 3rd November 2007 17:49 CET
Online: http://www.thelocal.se/8995/

Sweden's foreign office has been unable to contact the its embassy in Pakistan since president Pervez Musharraf declared emergency rule in the country on Saturday ...

Foreign minister Carl Bildt viewed developments in Pakistan as "seriously worrying" ...

The Swedish foreign minister said that sending the army onto the streets was not the solution to Pakistan's problem.

"This means that the democratic endeavours have been put on hold," he said ...

http://www.thelocal.se/8995/20071103/

[Faygo Kid]

10. What do the neocons have to say now?

This doesn't fit their worldview. It will be interesting to read what the war worshippers have to say about this. My guess is that clowns like Krauthammer, Fred Barnes and (especially) Bill Kristol won't even address this.

Except to use it as an excuse to attack Iran.

[Igel]

12. Not much, that I can find.

Some have been following the country more closely. Biden's revelation is nothing more than what you'd have gotten from a Pakistani newspaper a week ago, or from the NYT if you've paid attention for the last month--it's good that some staffer briefed him on it. (And yes, it's been precisely that obvious.)

Kurtz has something, but it's mostly a description: No solution, and since there's nothing to be done there's no cause for outrage.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTJhMDUwOWQ4MGJhMGI0MzJkYTc3MzkyNjI4NzM0OWI=

Trying to fit this comfortably into a worldview is tough. The only way to make it fit is to lop off lots of bits to make it into something it isn't.

Personally, I can't work up any more outrage than Kurtz can. First, understand. Second, form opinion. Third, emote. I've followed Pakistan fairly closely in the Pak press since late 2001, figuring that's where the action would be. But I can't predict how this is going to turn out: Every decision that some here think would be good would bear a fairly large cost--as does Musharraf's declaring emergency rule. How to weight them ... will the PPP take the the streets? Will the PML support Musharraf or side with the MMA? What will Chaudhry, Iqbal, and the other justices do? Sharif? Will the ISI continue to act up, and will they get the military on their side? Will the maulanas up in FATA and the NWFP decide it's time to really take their campaign on the road--and if the local warlords that aren't necessarily always on their side say no? What about the tribal leaders, do they still have power--and if so, is the "anbar option" available, and can Musharraf implement it? Will a lone jihadi get through and kill Musharraf, as they've tried to do before? And if so, can the horribly misnamed Fazlullah and his allies empty the madaris to wrest control--and would the "liberals" actually resist? Will the jurists get the police on their side and reject new chief justice Dogar?

See? Too many questions to bother with outrage. At least Parliament's still able to meet, maybe that'll blow off steam and let some air into the room. Or not--it could just rile things up. More questions, more options, and more things to weigh.