Regarding the death of Musharraf, there is a current discussion about the saying “don’t speak ill of the dead.” I would like to illustrate my perspective by referencing the case of Dr. Rhonda Jarrar, a tenured professor at Fresno State University.
On the day of Barbara Bush’s passing, Dr. Rhonda Jarrar tweeted that she was an “amazing racist” who raised a war criminal, George W. Bush. Her tweets, made on the night of the former First Lady’s death, received widespread criticism from across the US media.
The timing of her tweets was certainly controversial and as Fresno State University is part of the publicly funded California State University system, many conservatives were outraged and called for her immediate dismissal from the university.
Fresno State University attempted to manage the situation and the university’s president stated that he did not condone the comments made. The university’s flag was also flown at half-mast. An investigation was launched into the conduct of Dr. Rhonda Jarrar and it appeared that she would be fired as a result of her tweets.
However, it’s important to note that the Iraq war led by Bush resulted in the death of over 1.1 million civilians and there was much debate over the legitimacy of the war. Some argued that Dr. Jarrar’s comments were made during her private time and not in the classroom.
Therefore, she was not fired as she had the right to freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment. Although this decision remains a topic of controversy, in my opinion, it was a wise decision. One should not be prevented from speaking out against someone simply because they have passed away.
If we were to follow the principle of not speaking ill of the dead in the case of Musharraf, then we would also have to defend neo-Nazis who praise Adolf Hitler. The Surah Abu Lahab in the Quran would also not exist. Musharraf was a war criminal and is responsible for many of the current issues in Pakistan. It is important to do what is necessary and speak the truth, regardless of the circumstances.
Musharraf was responsible for the deaths of 70,000 people, yet some still try to justify his actions. They defend his decisions such as leaving soldiers stranded in Kargil, imposing martial law on Oct 12th, 1999, the conflict in Dera Bugti, and the Lal Masjid operation. It’s important to speak out against such injustices, as failing to do so will allow his sympathizers to control the narrative.
Traitor Musharraf Sentenced to Death
It had been reported that former military dictator Pervez Musharraf has been sentenced to death in Pakistan. This decision was seen as a victory for democracy, as the ruling holds Musharraf accountable for his actions during his time in power. The sentence serves as a reminder that even those in positions of power are not immune from consequences and that democracy remains the best form of government for ensuring accountability and justice.
The death sentence of former dictator Musharraf for betraying the country and violating the constitution served as a reminder that no one is above the law. Although it is unlikely that he will return to face the consequences, the verdict serves as an important symbol for future leaders who may attempt to undermine democracy in Pakistan.
A special court in Pakistan had sentenced Pervez Musharraf to death in a treason case. The verdict was given by a three-member bench, headed by the Chief Justice of the Peshawar High Court, and was delivered with a 2-1 majority. Musharraf, a former military dictator, has the option to appeal the verdict in the Supreme Court. The treason case against him was filed in December 2013 and he was indicted in March 2014. The verdict is being seen as a landmark decision, setting an important precedent for those who believe they are above the law in Pakistan. This punishment is seen as symbolic justice for the dictatorship and its supporters. Despite this verdict, many doubt that he will ever face true justice as the military establishment may not be happy with this decision. The case highlights the responsibility of the establishment and the need for the military to stay within its constitutional boundaries. The verdict is a small victory for those who have suffered at the hands of Musharraf and hope that future rogue generals will think twice before violating the constitution.
The autocratic regime of General Musharraf
Today’s events will reveal the commitment of PTI to civilian supremacy. Instead of reacting to everything, it is advisable to observe their behavior, language, and actions. The Twitter archives of today will serve as valuable reference material for months and years to come.
These families have personally benefited from Musharraf’s actions and they do not care that he sold out Pakistan. They support Imran Khan for the same reasons. A group of people who support PTI is those who appreciated Musharraf for his tenure, the economy, and the Higher Education Commission. They were influenced by the bubble-consumer-based economy and were not involved in the Chief Justice restoration movement, even though they were aware of his actions in the Lal Masjid Saga. This group includes military children and children of military personnel.
Democracy is the Best Revenge
According to an interview with General Shahid Aziz in Jan 2013, who held high-profile positions during Musharraf’s regime, on GEO TV, Nawaz Sharif’s claims that he was not informed by the Army high command about the Kargil operation have now been confirmed by Musharraf’s former DGMO, CGS, and Chairman NAB. General Aziz states that even the corp commanders and PSOs at GHQ were not aware of the plan. Thus, Musharraf must be held responsible for this misadventure. If it were not for Nawaz Sharif’s actions, the situation could have become even more disastrous and potentially resulted in a full-scale war.
General Aziz also reveals that the army’s high command had a plan in place for a military coup well before it took place on October 12th. This completely undermines Musharraf’s claim that the army only acted after he was removed as army chief and his plane was hijacked.
Let this day serve as a lesson to all undemocratic individuals and groups:
The deceased should not be honored without question. End of story.