One wonders what motivated the writer to excoriate the army for its alleged antireform credentials.
The writer`s derogatory referral to the army`s putative anti-reform roles was at best an intellectually fatuous and at worst a factually libellous act.
After rueing the incompetence and inability of the main `dramatis personae` on the national political firmament to challenge the neo-liberal market imperialism, he makes a specious conclusion that what stands in the way of his socialist model is the army. A more tendentious and intellectually vacuous argument unsupported by facts would be hard to find.
He alluded to the Okara farmers` protest againstthe corporateintrusion ofthe army`s welfare projects without understanding the basics about the welfare project management of an institution that works for the amelioration of martyrs and wounded veterans with absolute transparency and adherence to lawful corporate practices.
It would not be out of place to question the basis of the writer`s tendentious assertion about the PTFs soft approach vis-a-vis the army. He needs to lift his blinkered vision to survey at least our neighbouring government and quote one example where a political party has contested elections by reviling its armed forces.
Remember the army has risen to be a deus ex machina in this vacuum of governance left by all shapes and stripes of political and intellectual socialists, free market believers and religious extremists.
The least once expects out of a columnist is to base his arguments on facts even while venting one`s spleen.
