The Supreme Court of Pakistan just got rid of the Prime Minister today. It seems the Supreme Courts all over the Middle East are taking action and getting rid of their governments.Here is the article:
ISLAMABAD - The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled Speaker National Assembly Fehmida Mirza’s ruling as void and declared that Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani stood disqualified since April 26.
“Yousuf Raza Gilani is disqualified from membership of parliament from April 26, the date of his conviction. He has also ceased to be the prime minister of Pakistan,” said Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, reading the order.
“The Election Commission shall issue a notice of disqualification and the president is required to take necessary steps to ensure continuation of democratic process,” he added.
A three-member bench, comprising Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja and Justice Khilji Arif Hussain heard a set of constitutional petitions challenging National Assembly Speaker Fehmida Mirza’s ruling over the reference against Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani.
The bench had been hearing a set of petitions filed by the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), the Pakistan Tehrik-i-Insaf (PTI), Azhar Chaudhry advocate and others challenging the speaker’s ruling of May 24 over the qualification issue.
Earlier during today’s hearing, Attorney General Irfan Qadir presented in court the National Assembly’s resolution endorsing the speaker’s ruling. The resolution had been moved by the government and was adopted by the NA on June 14.
“We respect the courts, however, state institutions should try to avoid clash amongst themselves,” the attorney general said.
Upon which the chief justice remarked that the judiciary respected the parliament and that there was no clash between the state’s institutions.
Justice Khilji remarked that the court’s duty was to interpret the law and the constitution and to stop all measures which violate these.
Qadir said that if the court issued an order against the speaker’s ruling, the parliament would declare it invalid.The prime minister is not answerable to the courts over the dispensation of his professional duties, the attorney general said.
What I found very interesting about this is the date of June 14th in the article. That date the National Assembly speaker had tried to keep the Prime Minister in office.
Do you remember that date in reference to what also happened in Pakistan?
The U.S. violated International Law that day - June 14th in Pakistan. The U.S. put the aircraft carrier in Pakistani waters without permission.
KARACHI - After failing to strike a deal on NATO supplies with Pakistan, the United States has moved its nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Enterprise into Pakistani territorial waters near Gawadar, according to media reports on Thursday. The ship’s deployment in Pakistan’s territorial waters is a violation of international laws. After the deployment of the aircraft carrier in Pakistani seas, the country’s security agencies are now investigating into the matter, sources said. They added that the movement apparently showed the increasing interest of the US in Balochistan province. “The US has moved its biggest aircraft carrier 65 to 70 nautical miles away from Gawadar in the second week of June,” a news website quoted its sources as saying. The USS Enterprise, which holds a crew of over 4,000, is a veteran of several wars.
So now I have to question, if the U.S. was sending a message to the Pakistani government? Notice the date it happened was also the 14th of June that sure is a funny coincidence, don't you think?
The Prime Minister of Pakistan - Yousaf Raza Gilani - who was just kicked out by the Supreme Court wanted better relations with the U.S.. So was the U.S. behind the PM and was trying to get a message across that he is to stay, or is it the opposite?
The President of Pakistan plans to announce who the new Prime Minister will be later today/tonight.
Interesting enough the Egyptian Supreme Court dissolved the Parliament of that country on the 14th of June too. Right before the elections of Egypt and then they gave the Egyptian Military full control and the military is now keeping that control, no matter who the President is.
Where does the U.S stand on these Supreme Court rulings? I haven't heard a word of "ourtage" from them about the Egyptian Supreme court ruling. To me that says they were behind it and support it. Otherwise we would have been hearing about how a court dissolved a "democratic" government. To me that says they want the military to keep control of Egypt, they must control all the generals of Egypt.
I did find where an "expert" says the U.S. has a great relationship with the Egyptian military.
Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank in Washington.The above says it all in where the U.S. stands with the military rule in Egypt. The U.S. is paying off the military of Egypt.
"We have had a long relationship with the Egyptian military and when it comes to existential issues, they will listen politely but they strongly believe that they understand both their population and their national interest better than well-meaning Americans," Alterman added.
Michele Dunne, a Middle East analyst at the Atlantic Council think tank in Washington, argued that the United States has influence on Egypt because of the large U.S. aid flows, notably to the Egyptian military, but has elected not to exercise it.
On March 23, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton released $1.3 billion in annual military aid for Egypt despite Cairo's failure to meet pro-democracy goals, saying U.S. national security required the continued military assistance.
I would like to know something about that. How come the U.S. doesn't have enough money to help out the individual states of the U.S., yet they have Billions to throw constantly at Pakistan, Israel, India and a whole list of other countries?
List of countries that get
I thought the U.S. only supported "Democratic Countries" I thought that is why we went into Iraq and Libya. Will we ever hear a word out of Obama or Hillary about Egypt and now Pakistan? Hasn't Obama said that here in the U.S., he thinks the Supreme Court is over stepping it bounds?
It seems the U.S. will continue to make the Middle East unstable through every way they can, instead of letting peace reign and letting the people of the respective countries vote and keep the governments they want.
Thanks for this. No doubt we are buying an approved outcome in Egypt as elsewhere. A NWO government while lots of blah blah about democracy. I'll never forget a brief glimpse on the news (!) of Egypt's gated "community" for the military - all our tax dollars.
ReplyDeleteGreat article, as always and shared. Regarding your closing text of "I thought the U.S. only supported "Democratic Countries" I thought that is why we went into Iraq and Libya." The political image appearing on the MSM would give that opinion. The CIA funded by this same government plays out not aligned. There is much history in the world of popularly elected leaders being removed by the government controlled CIA (or is that reversed?) to be replaced by a minion puppet as dictator. Simply look to Iran in 1953. And the blowback keeps rolling on... Pro USA only, but not blindly supporting illegal / unConstitutional actions.
ReplyDelete