See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

1. Hot Air » Blog Archive » Musharraf sets elections for February 15 Update: Report that Bhutto is under house arrest
2. Rhymes With Right
3. alphabet city

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #1
   On November 9th, 2007 at 12:33 am, puhiawa said:

   This is a seriously dangerous move. I am curious.

2. #2
   On November 9th, 2007 at 12:46 am, Prime Director said:

   Police also warned that up to eight suicide bombers have infiltrated Rawalpindi, raising the spectre of a repeat of the double suicide blast that killed 139 people at her homecoming parade in Karachi on October 18.

   If preventing another Bhutto rally prevents another 150 deaths, is it justified?

3. #3
   On November 9th, 2007 at 12:48 am, nyc123me said:

   Sounds like Burma..

4. #4
   On November 9th, 2007 at 12:57 am, swj719AWG said:

   I fear that she is not long for this world.

5. #5
   On November 9th, 2007 at 1:04 am, leepro said:

   #2 Prime Director said:

   If preventing another Bhutto rally prevents another 150 deaths, is it justified?

   So… what? Arrest all the good guys, and all the bad guys’ll stop being bad? Everything would be just hunky-dory if everybody would “just get along?”

   /sheesh

6. #6
   On November 9th, 2007 at 1:09 am, feebiebabe said:

   If preventing another Bhutto rally prevents another 150 deaths, is it justified?

   What is the value you place on the importance of Freedom of Speech? Or backing down from a bully.

   I would imagine, it’s all relative.

   For me, no, not justified.

7. #7
   On November 9th, 2007 at 1:50 am, puhiawa said:

   For all her pretense, this woman is evil. Her father instated Sharia and she has used Islam for her own profit. She is corrupt. But then that is the way of Islam.

8. #8
   On November 9th, 2007 at 2:06 am, Prime Director said:

   #s 5 and 6 and anyone else who’s knee is ready to jerk: Go easy on the sanctimony and let me play devil’s advocate for a moment.

   During time of war, the free exercise of rights is often curtailed.

   Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, Wilson enacted the Sedition Act, FDR interned japanese (and german) citizens en masse. W employed warrentless searches.

   Is Musharraf’s government not at war? What steps would you take if you were in his shoes?

   His position is precarious, to say the least. He’s really on the horns of a dilemma: being perceived as too much of a strong man by his democratic rivals or being perceived as too weak by the jihadis. Which is the greater danger to the established order, whatever its faults?

   If a suicide bomber killed 150 people in the US, don’t you think there’d be a serious curtailment of the free exercise of our rights by the authorities, at least temporarily?

   Think back to Katrina, or the L.A. riots. There were curfews and limits on the right of the citizenry to bear arms and assemble. How much more serious is the situation in Pakistan?

   Are you sure Mussharaf’s doing the wrong thing?

9. #9
   On November 9th, 2007 at 2:33 am, swj719AWG said:

   PD has a point of sorts…

   But when a guy who came to power via overthrowing the legit government later places under “house arrest” the very person he ousted, I fear for the detained party.

10. #10
    On November 9th, 2007 at 6:47 am, zorro said:

    Liberty and Freedom are on the move around the world.

    Burma cannot stop Freedom. Pakistan with it’s nukes cannot give the Taliban an opening. Rough times ahead.

    The tree of Liberty must be watered, from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

11. #11
    On November 9th, 2007 at 8:14 am, notanexpert said:

    Does anybody know why Michelle chooses to use “Burma” instead of “Myanmar?”

12. #12
    On November 9th, 2007 at 8:20 am, Boomer said:

    I’m still amazed the woman is alive. She is extremely brave and backing her position by gambling with her life. Personally I think she has more to worry about from the Jihadist in Pakistan then she does from Musharraf. The situation in Pakistan makes me very nervous to think if Musharraf falls there will be a very good chance the Islamist could get their hands on the countries nuclear weapons. Not a pleasant thought for the US our India this could spin totally out of control. Pray for sanity to return to this divided country and the safety of Ms. Bhutto.

    Off Topic: I just heard the Administration just caved at Boise State University to allow a 21 gun salute to honor America’s veterans at 1200 hrs on Monday. The outrage by the good citizens of Idaho made the liberal Administration cave in like the whims they are. Not to mention some of the alumni threatened to with hold funds to the school. Since I have the day off I am planning to go down to BSU and celebrate with the honor guard performing the ceremony. Now to get Congress to pass the Defense Appropriation to truly honor our current crop of veteran’s risking their lives around the world.

13. #13
    On November 9th, 2007 at 9:51 am, Antaradus said:

    notanexpert #11, I believe both “Burma” and “Myanmar” are correct and acceptable, like “Britain” and “UK” are often used interchangeably (although there is a subtle difference between the two).

14. #14
    On November 9th, 2007 at 10:08 am, iowavette said:

    Is Bhutto actually a heroine or is she a corrupt, Islamic ideologue? I hear both.

15. #15
    On November 9th, 2007 at 10:22 am, conservativesRus said:

    #14…she might be a heroine to the corrupt Islamic ideologues. And since we know that Islamic interpretation of all history is correct, then she’s a heroine.

16. #16
    On November 9th, 2007 at 10:23 am, uhangtight said:

    i’m curious, too, cause just because she is preacing feedom and democracy could it be to gain sympathy and backing from the world? i don’t trust islam, they are told to lie to their enemies, it is good and acceptable.

    i hear she prefers Sharia law, too. i am keeping my judgements for now but watching cautiously. do not want to see the nukes in the hands of taliban or islamic sharia bent crazies!

17. #17
    On November 9th, 2007 at 10:32 am, nyc123me said:

    @ #11: I can’t speak for Michelle, but I use ‘Burma’ as a kind of acknowledgment to pre-Musharraf times. I believe though that Myanmar is the written name of the country, while Burma is the oral name of the country, or something like that. Here, I looked it up:

    In 1989, the military regime of Burma set up a commission in charge of reviewing the place names of Burma in the English language.. and decided to replace the English name Burma with Myanmar. There were three reasons for that:

    First, Myanma is the official name of the country in the Burmese language, and the aim of the commission was to have English place names aligned with Burmese place names and pronunciation (another example, Rangoon was changed to Yangon to reflect the fact that the “r” sound was abandoned long ago in Burmese and replaced with a “y”).

    Second, the military thought that the name Myanma was more inclusive of minorities than the name Bama, and so they wanted the English name of the country to reflect this.

    Finally, the military regime has long been suspicious of the colloquial Burmese language, which it perceives as subversive (this is probably the main reason imho). The regime is promoting the literary language, and so it wanted to get rid of the English name “Burma” which mirrors the colloquial Burmese name Bama.

18. #18
    On November 9th, 2007 at 10:33 am, Sanddog said:

    Why is it that the media never reports on her acceptance, funding and use of the Taliban when she was last in office? Is that and the charges of corruption from the French, Swiss, Polish and Spanish off limits because she’s a leftist?

19. #19
    On November 9th, 2007 at 10:51 am, Reg.conservative said:

    I would suggest wikipedia,long read. I need to study it a lot more.

20. #20
    On November 9th, 2007 at 10:51 am, sivapragasam said:

    nyc123me
    

    …I use ‘Burma’ as a kind of acknowledgment to pre-Musharraf times…..

    What.

    P.S. MM, please avoid posting together.

21. #21
    On November 9th, 2007 at 10:57 am, conservativesRus said:

    Folks…Burma (Myanmar) and Pakistan are two different countries dealing with two different problems. No they don’t “touch” each other. India is a rather large country in between the two.
    Apparently world geography (lack thereof) was (un)successfully taught by our public schools but the children all felt good about themselves.

22. #22
    On November 9th, 2007 at 11:28 am, SircleMemphis said:

    Be careful about drawing parallels between Bhutto and Suu Kyi. Ms. Suu Kyi is the genuine article, a voice and beacon of democracy in a totalitarian state. Bhutto has been run out of her country for looting it blind not once, but twice, actively supported the formation of the Taliban, and is directly challenging an ELECTED official trying to save his nuclear armed country from Islamic extremists. She shouldn’t get a free pass just because she’s a woman.

23. #23
    On November 9th, 2007 at 12:00 pm, CharlieT said:

    I guess what goes around, comes around. Before you start shedding too many crocodile tears for Bhutto, check out this excerot form a New York Times January 30, 1997 story (caution: I can’t remember how dishonest the NYT was back then).

    High Court Finds Bhutto Corrupt, Ending Her Bid to Block Election

    Former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto lost her bid to regain office when the Supreme Court ruled today that her ousted Government was corrupt. New elections will be held as planned on Monday.

    Nawaz Sharif, whose earlier Government was also dismissed on corruption charges, in 1993, is the front-runner in the elections.

    President Farooq Leghari dismissed Ms. Bhutto’s Government in November, two years before her term was to expire. He accused her of driving Pakistan toward economic ruin, stealing billions from the national treasury and using the police in Karachi to quash a rival political movement.

    Ms. Bhutto denied the charges.

    But Chief Justice Sajjad Ali Shah told the court there was abundant evidence to support the charges, and in a 6-1 ruling, the judges upheld the President’s actions and ordered the general elections to go ahead as scheduled.

    ”There is significant proof of corruption,” Justice Shah said. ”There is enough evidence which shows the Government was involved in extrajudicial killings.” Ms. Bhutto’s Government was accused of allowing police squads to kill members of an opposition political group, the Mohajir Qami Movement. The movement represents Indian Muslims who fled to Pakistan when British India was divided in 1947.

24. #24
    On November 9th, 2007 at 12:36 pm, nyc123me said:

    @conservativesRus #21: of course we are (or at least I am) aware they are different countries. Did you actually read Michelle’s entry at all - Michelle writes regarding both countries.. or did you just read the title and assume the rest? There are certain similarities in the two situations mentioned.

    @sivapragasam #20: what what?

25. #25
    On November 9th, 2007 at 5:37 pm, lonewolf said:

    I usually have a solution for all international quandries but damned if I know what to do about Pakistan. Stick with Musharraf, I think, I guess, I dunno.

26. #26
    On November 10th, 2007 at 9:56 am, lgm said:

    All you who want to bomb Iran, why not invade Pakistan instead. They already have nuclear weapons and seem to be on the verge of an Islamic fundamentalist revolution.

    The martial law in Pakistan is a direct result of Bush blundering. How? Bush committed too few troops to overthrowing the Taliban in Afganistan. They quickly withdrew most US forces so they can invade Iraq. That allowed many of them to go to the tribal areas in western Pakistan, where they destabilize the government.

27. #27
    On November 10th, 2007 at 10:29 pm, NHMagenta said:

    IMO, Allowing Benazir Bhutto to return to Pakistan was a move of sheer insanity!
    She should be put on the next plane out of Pakistan back to Dubai…and should face a World Court tribunal for conspiracy to rob the nation of Pakistan (see the Wikipedia article for starters).
    I don’t think there will ever be a successful Western style republican democracy in any Islamic-majority country; Islam and our concepts of governance are simply incompatible .