Don Imus: He Has Prostate Cancer

The broadcaster Don Imus said that he has prostate cancer, the Web site of New York’s WCBS television station reported. Mr. Imus, 68, made the remarks during the Monday morning broadcast of his syndicated “Imus in the Morning” radio program, which in New York is broadcast on WABC-AM radio; he said that he had stage II prostate cancer, giving no further details of his prognosis, but added that he was confident his doctors would beat it.

According to, Mr. Imus speculated on air that the cancer could be a result of stress. Discussing his diagnosis on the show, Mr. Imus said, “The day you find out is fine. But the next morning when you get up, your knees are shaking. I didn’t think I could make it to work.”

In a statement, a spokesman for Mr. Imus said: “Don appreciates the good wishes he’s already received from his listeners and viewers. After years at the Imus Ranch surrounded by inspirational children battling cancer, Don is well-prepared to fight this. And no, this does not make him eligible for the kids’ rodeo competition.”

Mr. Imus was heavily criticized in 2007 for making disparaging remarks on air about the Rutgers women’s basketball team; his shows on CBS Radio and MSNBC were canceled, but he resumed broadcasting on ABC later that year.


Long March or Wrong March ? Why The Pakistani Military Won’t Intervene

The Pakistani military will not intervene to protect President Asif Ali Zardari or his nemesis Nawaz Sharif. Although firmly opposed to intervention as per the wishes of Army Chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the Pakistani military is nonetheless exploring all options to deal with the looming specter of a total collapse of government leading to anarchy across the country.

There is a common feeling in military circles that Pakistan’s elite political class should bear the responsibility for its decisions. The full range of the public administration abilities of these politicians, many of whom have been elected more than twice and thrice, are exposed as sharply lacking. The political class consists of people who are recycled, tried, tested and failed.

But the ineptitude of Pakistani politicians has entered a dangerous phase now. The new threat includes creating an ethnic confrontation between two provinces, Sindh and Punjab, which could result from the aggressive drive by Mr. Nawaz Sharif to dislodge the Zardari government.

This time Pakistanis are seeing a breathtaking failure and irresponsible behavior across the board.


The incompetence of President Zardari is evident in the manner in which he deliberately pushed all his political enemies to align themselves against him simultaneously. The support for Mr. Zardari’s government from the United States and the United Kingdom is a matter of deep concern for many Pakistanis. These Pakistanis feel that Mr. Zardari’s government is a vehicle for Washington and London to contain Pakistan’s military, intelligence agencies and its nuclear and advanced missile programs. They cite the examples of the behavior of this government in the aftermath of the Mumbai attacks, the attempts to sideline and dismantle ISI, and the acceptance of U.S. military’s aerial and ground border violations. In this sense, Mr. Zardari has few friends within the Pakistani public opinion. His ouster is the demand of most Pakistani nationalists.

But Mr. Nawaz Sharif’s role is no less deceptive and destructive than that of Mr. Zardari’s. The former premier, who is denouncing Mr. Zardari today, played the most important role in helping Mr. Zardari become President. Nawaz Sharif helped Zardari come to power. It is hypocritical for Mr. Sharif now to condemn NRO (the law that Musharraf promulgated on Anglo-American desire to facilitate the return of the Bhutto-Zardari combine back to power) when his own political career is at stake. Nawaz Sharif’s recent outbursts are not principled politics but revenge. The sorry part is that the lawyers and the media have failed to put this opportunism by Mr. Sharif on the spotlight.

Mr. Sharif has also declared ‘rebellion’ against the State and has encouraged policemen and government officials to declare mutiny. This is the most dangerous aspect of this crisis. The fact that Pakistani television commentators have almost ignored this dangerous call is surprising. For those Pakistanis who had condemned, in 2005, the rebellion against the State by politician-turned-terrorist Akbar Bugti, Mr. Sharif’s statements came as a shock. It is possible that in the near future, Bugti-wannabes will quote Sharif’s example to justify such rebellions. Their argument will be, ‘You ignore the calls for rebellion from Punjab politicians but condemn those from smaller provinces.’

Another alarming development was how Mr. Sharif resorted to portray his issues with Mr. Zardari as a battle between the entire Punjab province and a President from Sindh.

This use of the so-called ‘Punjab card’ by the Sharif brothers sets a dangerous precedent. Pakistan’s security managers must stay alert to the possibility of trouble in Sindh if the Zardari government falls. There are indications that subversive elements will stoke trouble by suggesting that Mr. Zardari’s government crumbled due to a mutiny led by Punjab.

This is why it is important that Mr. Nawaz Sharif does not emerge from this crisis with more political influence than what he had before the crisis. Pakistanis are right in wanting Mr. Zardari and his team out, but the Sharif brothers are not the right replacement. This is also why it is important to heed the advice of Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain of the PML-Q. Shujaat has proposed a three-party coalition government in Punjab, where Mr. Sharif will have to share power with both PPPP and PML-Q.


It was surprising to see some Pakistani commentators describe the panicked American and British diplomatic moves to save the Zardari government as ‘good this time’ because, in the words of these commentators, the two countries were trying to stabilize Pakistan and save democracy.

The reality comes with a twist. Such naïveté on the part of some Pakistanis is unfortunate and shows the extent to which Pakistan stands confused and disturbed thanks to the constant barrage of Anglo-American psychological operations, missile attacks, and covert insurgencies being waged against this country by the powers that occupy Afghanistan.

The fact is that Washington and London moved swiftly to save the Zardari government regardless of whether they like Mr. Zardari or not. This is a government in which Washington had made huge investment. It is part of a ‘deal’ linked to the Anglo-American interests in the region.

It is incorrect that Washington ‘does not trust’ President Zardari, as some Pakistani commentators have been saying recently. The Americans accepted Benazir Bhutto after a long neglect when they felt they needed to counterbalance the Pakistani military and Musharraf, whom America and Britain did not trust.

President Zardari is as acceptable to Washington and London as Benazir Bhutto was when the ‘deal’ was brokered by the two capitals to force a beleaguered Musharraf to share power with someone the Anglo-Americans could trust.

The real problem this time was that President Zardari made an unnecessary move that threatened this government and made the military takeover look good to many Pakistanis. The Americans need this democracy so that they can use its players to counterbalance the Pakistani military in Afghanistan and Kashmir. They know it is easy to meddle in Pakistan. They know that Pakistani politicians are characterless, corrupt and easily buyable through money and power. There are no political parties in Pakistan, only political families with their own interests. It is easy for foreign powers to manipulate these players for their interests.

So U.S. and U.K. intervened to save ‘democracy’ and avert the scary possibility of the Anglo-Americans having to deal with the Pakistani military in the driving seat again.


Despite the good intentioned statements to the contrary, the lawyers’ movement has become thoroughly politicized by now. Pakistanis have noticed how Mr. Nawaz Sharif, a political partisan with his own agenda, has become the face of the movement and its official spokesperson.

In 2007, wily politicians too scared to directly confront the military government sheepishly hid behind the lawyers’ movement and used it to topple the military government.

In 2008, the politicians ditched the lawyers and refused to boycott elections under a military ruler.

In 2009, one politician, Nawaz Sharif, is using the lawyers to topple another politician, Asif Zardari.

Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan played a key role in turning the movement into a tool for ambitious politicians. Chaudhry Iftikhar, the deposed chief justice, would have done a great service by decisively shunning this overt politicization. But even he, after being released from house arrest in March 2008, dashed straight to the residence of Asif Zardari, not a president then but the leader of the party in government, to thank him for releasing him. When Zardari shunned him, Iftikhar is now basking in the glory of Mr. Sharif.

Mr. Sharif is no innocent political player and the message of change that the lawyers’ movement is promoting cannot happen with Mr. Sharif at the helm.

The question is: Have the two Chaudhrys - Iftikhar and Aitzaz – irreparably politicized the noble cause of an independent judiciary? If he is restored, will Chaudhry Iftikhar be in a position to fairly deal with Mr. Sharif and the other political players in the country?

Then there is also this: Pakistan does need an independent judiciary. But this should come as part of wider changes in the entire political system that is falling apart. Merely reinstating a few judges, who are also now politicized, will never solve the problem for good.


The media in Pakistan has also gone berserk, becoming politically partisan under the pretext of siding with truth. First its hype helped these failed politicians come to power. The media failed to help the Pakistani public opinion ask questions about the past record of these politicians before electing them. During the run-up to the 2008 elections, the media suppressed any criticism of these politicians under the pretext of fighting dictatorship. And today when these politicians have plunged the nation into another unnecessary confrontation because of their lust for power, the media has readily become a tool in this fight, siding with one party against another. Until now, there is no regulation whatsoever of this important medium of influence. Other countries have sophisticated media management systems that wage diplomatic and military wars. In Pakistan, this important pillar of national security is running amok.


If democracy could turn into horror, it just did in Pakistan. Politicians and partisan activists posing as civil society have just turned Pakistan into the butt of global jokes: a nation with vast economic, geographic, cultural and military potential that is unable to produce a mature, educated leadership.

This internal chaos is excellent fodder for the propaganda that strong lobbies in the United States have been engaging in against Pakistan over the past two years, trying to convince the world that Pakistan is a dangerous country that desperately needs U.S. military intervention and containment of its nuclear and strategic programs.

The worst part is that even if the judges are restored and Mr. Nawaz Sharif’s government in Punjab is reinstated, this failed political system in Pakistan will keep generating artificial tensions and crises linked to dogfights among politicians over booty. Pakistan is ripe for a major overhaul in its political structure and foreign policy. Sooner or later, the ball will fall in the military’s court. When that happens, the military better be ready with creative solutions because old-style coups won’t work this time.

Originolly Posted Here: