Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Musharraf Willingly Allowed Us Operations Inside Pakistan
Pakistani Defence Forum > Pakistan's National Security > Army Related Forum
Londo Molari
http://thepost.com.pk/Ba_ShortNewsT.aspx?f...fstatus=Current

Referendum was a blunder: Jamshaid

Only Musharraf briefed on Kargil | Op Silence was overkill

The Post Report

ISLAMABAD: Former Core Commander Rawalpindi and Federal Public Service Commission ex-Chairman Lt General ® Jamshaid Gulzar Kiyani said the 9/11 was a major setback but later decisions taken by President Pervez Musharraf caused a huge loss to the country.

Talking to a private TV channel Monday, he held top army leadership responsible for defeat in 1971 war. He said that the role of General Niazi was shameful. "Pakistani military fought 1965 and 1971 wars with great courage but politicians deserve no credit for it," he remarked.

He said not Nawaz Sharif but Musharraf was briefed on the Kargil issue. "A probe into the Kargil venture should be completed," he added. He said the Indian Army had started heavy bombardment in Kargil. He said the Indian Army had greater strength in military but Pakistan still kept higher standards.

He said issues were openly discussed in core commanders' meetings and it was a wrong impression that corps commanders did not fully express their feelings.

He said disputes surfaced in the core commander's meeting after 9/11 incident. He said Nawaz Sharif approached the US to save the Pakistan Army from disgrace. He said the impression that Nawaz Sharif had ordered surrender was created by President Musharraf. "The plane hijacking event was a false story fabricated by President Musharraf for blaming Nawaz Sharif. He said "we had grabbed Indians from the neck in Kargil war".

The former core commander further said the referendum was completely false and he had advised against it. He said the masses were the real power of a national leader. He said the government had been fighting for the interests of the US. "The country has been gripped by the suicide attacks and it's after effects were out of control," he added.

Commenting on Lal Masjid, he said it was highly important for Al-Qaeda. He termed the attack on Lal Masjid sheer cruelty while he said "I am an army man by nature and profession but still I cannot imagine throwing hand grenades on innocent people. The use of phosphorus bombs that burns human skin and flesh was not required in the Lal Masjid operation." He said students and militants would have surrendered if more time was given.

He hoped the movement started by ex-service men would be successful. "I support them.. Moreover, he said, "President Musharraf should not be given a safe passage so that nobody will follow in his footprints," he added.

"Incase President Musharraf escapes the impeachment trial, dictators will keep on ruling the country and the situation will never change," the retired soldier said. Criticising President Musharraf's relation with the US, he said Colin Powel called him and asked him weather he was with them or against them upon which he yielded. He also raised the question of missing people and said they were either sent to Guantanamo Bay or were in jails. Nothing was proved when Mula Zaeef was released from Guantanamo Bay after two years, he added.

He said ISI should not be used for wrong purposes. He said President Musharraf could have been a successful leader, had he made use of our loyal suggestions. He said he had advised the president to doff army uniform on August 14, 2004. He said President Musharraf and former PM Shaukat Aziz carried all the appointments according to their personal wishes. The bombardment on Bajaur Agency and Waziristan was carried out by US Cobra Helicopters which was witnessed by the local people. The job should have been done by Pakistan Army if needed, he added. He said the ex-servicemen have decided to support the deposed judiciary as well as deposed chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. The regime of president Musharraf was the worst era and its sole responsible was President Musharraf himself. He added. He advised the masses to take to the streets for Musharraf's impeachment. However, he said, President Musharraf will drag his feet and will not easily let go off his power.
Mangla
"Witnessed by local people". Need to revisit your high school history books. Question of strengths and weakenesses of the source need to be discussed.

Stupidly people are posting threads that back up their own political views.

No one knows the real picture. I seriously suggest you read this people.


QUOTE
Comparing sources

Top Tips
When you are asked to compare to sources and decide on their reliability and/or usefulness make sure you analyse both
For each source analyse its strengths and weaknesses - what makes it reliable/useful, what detracts from its reliability/utility
Come to a conclusion! Don't say they are both of the same reliability or usefulness, choose one and state your case clearly

Looking at Bias
Don't fall into the trap of calling a source biased just because it is written by someone on a particular side of a dispute. Make sure you have grounds for describing a source as biased!

The essential skill is to explain how and why a source is biased and to explain why it matters that a source is biased namely that it affects its reliability and perhaps usefulness

When considering reliability ask these questions
Does this source distort the facts?
Does it give one side of the story or is it balanced
Does it deliberately attempt to mislead?
Can the views expressed in the source be corroborated?

When thinking about usefulness
The key trigger here is an understanding of what your line of enquiry is. For instance a biased source might be extremely useful if you are investigating the opinions of a particular group at a particular time, but less useful if you were asked to investigate "the facts" of an event

When sources disagree
It is an examiner favourite to ask why two or more sources don't agree.
Don't just describe the sources back to the examiner - this is how they disagree not why. Also take care to remain focussed - you have not been asked about reliability or usefulness here!

To understand why sources disagree requires an understanding of motive - why did the author produce the source? You also need to consider the different access that each author would have had to the facts. For instance a British historian might have better access to source material on British history than a Chinese one!
You also need to take into account the background, nationality, culture, religion etc. of the author and decide whether this may have had some bearing on how things have been interpreted in the source

Use all the sources and your own knowledge
This type of question often requires you to study a relatively high number of sources and to agree or disagree on a particular statement. These are frequently questions worth many marks!

Consider carefully the statement offered by the examiner e.g. "Louis Pasteur was the most significant person in the history of medicine"
Do you agree or disagree with it. Often as in the example given it is most sensible to disagree (explain why Louis Pasteur was important but explain the importance of others in the history of medicine)
List your knowledge which supports the statement
List your knowledge which does not support the statement
Look to the sources and add evidence from the sources to both your lists
You will know be in a position to write a balanced answer
Try not to sit on the fence - come to a conclusion!!

Reliability: Factors affecting reliability

Questions to consider for Written Sources
Was the author an eyewitness and if so how long since the events did the writing take place?
Did the author have access to all the relevant facts?
Did the author have access to a variety of different sources? Is there evidence of balance in the source?
Under what circumstances was the author writing - was he/she free to speak his/her mind freely?
Was the author trying to persuade people to share his/her views?
If the source is all opinion is it opinion typical of others at the time?

Questions to consider for pictorial sources
Drawings and paintings
Was it the artist's intention to give an accurate picture or a factual representation of what occurred? Or was it created to form opinion? What was the motive of the artist?
If the picture was intended to be an accurate representation, was the artist an eyewitness?
Was the picture a product of the artist's imagination?

Cartoons
These are frequently deliberately exaggerated for effect and in many cases simply unreal e.g. Winston Churchill portrayed with the body of a bull dog. In such cases it is clear that that the picture itself is not "reliable" so you will have to consider whether the message of the picture is reliable (did Churchill have bulldog qualities?). Does the message accurately reflect the generally held opinion of the person, event or thing?

Photos
The camera sometimes lies! However it is very unlikely that "doctored" photos will appear in exam papers. However staged photographs will often appear! Think of the College prospectus with all those happy hardworking students contently working away behind the screens of high specification computers! Ask yourself whether the photograph portrays events which are typical of such a context. Consider also the motive of the person who may have staged the photograph.

Statistics
Have they been collected accurately?
Have the numbers been simplified - rounded up or down?
Has the scale been altered for effect?

Enjoy learning about history? Check out our fun history site and get help with history homework. Learn how you could earn an online college degree in history or get information an education grants.
dargay
Did the current government say anything about latest Bajaur attack ? No
platinum786
we are discussing the same story in military and stratgic issues forum
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.