<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Supreme Injustice: Are SC Justices Clueless About The Law?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://fkpolitics.wordpress.com/2010/10/21/supreme-injustice-are-sc-justices-clueless-about-the-law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://fkpolitics.wordpress.com/2010/10/21/supreme-injustice-are-sc-justices-clueless-about-the-law/</link>
	<description>Discuss Pakistan</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 18:58:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: nota</title>
		<link>http://fkpolitics.wordpress.com/2010/10/21/supreme-injustice-are-sc-justices-clueless-about-the-law/#comment-1128</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[nota]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Oct 2010 03:01:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fkpolitics.wordpress.com/?p=2069#comment-1128</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Now add to that the non-decision on the eighteenth amendment. Again both &#039;sides&#039; are claiming &#039;victory&#039; over the (non)decision:  Gilani saying &quot;See, SC ruling proves SC agrees parliament is supreme&#039; and SC talk heads saying &quot;See, Justices have shown restraint but ruled SC has the right to strike down the amendments&quot;. What a crock. The only thing this (non)decision (remember also that they &quot;kept quiet on the rest of the 26 challenges&quot;) puts a biggest possible stamp of approval on the supposedly dead doctrine of necessity.

Of course it is being hailed as a great decision:
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/04-18-amendment-verdict-qs-02&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;18th Amendment: Ball back in parliament’s court&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/12-courts+decision+hailed+in+political+legal+circles--bi-03&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Court’s decision hailed in political, legal circles&lt;/a&gt;
BARF!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now add to that the non-decision on the eighteenth amendment. Again both &#8216;sides&#8217; are claiming &#8216;victory&#8217; over the (non)decision:  Gilani saying &#8220;See, SC ruling proves SC agrees parliament is supreme&#8217; and SC talk heads saying &#8220;See, Justices have shown restraint but ruled SC has the right to strike down the amendments&#8221;. What a crock. The only thing this (non)decision (remember also that they &#8220;kept quiet on the rest of the 26 challenges&#8221;) puts a biggest possible stamp of approval on the supposedly dead doctrine of necessity.</p>
<p>Of course it is being hailed as a great decision:<br />
<a href="http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/04-18-amendment-verdict-qs-02" rel="nofollow">18th Amendment: Ball back in parliament’s court</a><br />
<a href="http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/12-courts+decision+hailed+in+political+legal+circles--bi-03" rel="nofollow">Court’s decision hailed in political, legal circles</a><br />
BARF!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Observer</title>
		<link>http://fkpolitics.wordpress.com/2010/10/21/supreme-injustice-are-sc-justices-clueless-about-the-law/#comment-1127</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Observer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2010 18:07:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fkpolitics.wordpress.com/?p=2069#comment-1127</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That&#039;s it. As long as we make compromises on vital issues as law and order, then we will definitely stay in the quicksand :(]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s it. As long as we make compromises on vital issues as law and order, then we will definitely stay in the quicksand <img src='http://s0.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
