Hate Speakers, Bigots, Patriots and Fascists in Jang Group - 2

An Editorial in Arab News on Salmaan Taseer's Tragic Death  : Murder in Pakistan - Leaders should stand up and rally the country against the forces of intolerance Jan 5, 2011 Unfortunately, Pakistan’s detractors will use this slaying to try and blacken its name. They will claim that bigotry and extremism have infiltrated every level of society. It will be used too by those who want to pressure the country into pursuing their political and military agendas. They will say it proves it is a chaotic and dangerous state and that if it is not to fall apart completely, it has to take tougher measures against terrorists and extremists — as if it were not already fighting with all its might against them! But that has not stopped the leaders of Germany, France and the UK demanding it do more. There will be those too, who use this killing to flaunt their fear and ignorance of Islam, claiming it as proof, after the church massacres in Baghdad and Alexandria, of growing Muslim extremism and bigotry worldwide. That is demonstrably untrue. There is bigotry in Pakistan but then it exists in every society. Clearly the murder was an act of religious fanaticism. But it was individuals who were responsible, not a mass movement. Taseer was murdered by one or perhaps more bigots who believed that he wanted to repeal the country’s blasphemy law. But he was a Muslim, not his murderer or those who, sickeningly, celebrate this evil deed. He worked for the good of his country trying to promote tolerance and understanding and peace between its different communities. He stood up against extremism and violence. It cost him his life and that makes him a martyr and his heartless, grinning murderer an ignorant instrument of evil. But while Pakistan has lost a bold campaigner for truth and justice, there is comfort for it in the knowledge that Taseer was not alone. There is a host of other activists whose faith is generous and embracing and who refuse to be intimidated by the twisted advocates of hatred. Pakistan is deeply shocked by this murder. This could be a defining moment for its leaders to stand up and rally the country against the deviant forces that would bring darkness to it and Islam. As for those Islamophobes who would see in Taseer’s murder proof of fanaticism, they should look instead to the Islam he stood for — a faith that pursues justice, truth and respect, the real Islam. REFERENCE: Murder in Pakistan - Leaders should stand up and rally the country against the forces of intolerance EDITORIAL Jan 5, 2011 22:38 http://arabnews.com/opinion/article229917.ece

Jang Group & GEO TV Murdered Salman Taseer (Abbas Athar BBC)

Jang Group & GEO TV Murdered Salman Taseer... by SalimJanMazari

سلمان تاثیر کے قتل اور میڈیا میں ان کے قاتل کی کوریج پر سینیئر صحافی اور ایکسپریس اخبار کے ایڈیٹر عباس اطہر سے گفتگو

پير 10 جنوری 2011 ,‭ 16:39 GMT 21:39 PST

http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/multimedia/2011/01/110110_abbas_athar_media_taseer_uk.shtml

I must confess, I have been very wary of a certain media house and its group of publications. Consider, for example, the so-called historian Dr Safdar Mahmood, who has used the pages of the media house’s Urdu newspaper to distort history week after week. One such example, now accepted as fact, is that Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani was tasked by Quaid-e-Azam to raise the Pakistani flag on August 14, 1947. The video of the August 14 ceremony is available on the BBC Urdu website as well as YouTube and it shows a Pakistani army officer raising the flag with Shabbir Ahmad Usmani not visible anywhere in the video. This is just one lie out of thousands that irresponsible columnists like Dr Safdar Mahmood have perpetuated over the years. Then you have Mr Ansar Abbasi, the foremost votary of bigotry in the publication business. He specialises in labelling people as anti-Islamic and anti-national. Some of his more prominent victims include people like Malala Yousafzai who he accuses of nothing less than blasphemy. He has railed day in and day out against evil “secularists” and “liberals” for destroying the “Islamic identity” of Pakistan. The media group’s television channel promotes Dr Aamir Liaqat Hussain who had on his show famously called for the killing of the Ahmedis leading to targeted killings of that community. Even Hamid Mir — with whom one sympathises — has in the past resorted to most intemperate language against people who disagree with him. The overall discourse of this media group has been right-wing with a conservative nationalist editorial policy. It is therefore amusing that now the same group is being accused of being anti-national. One cannot help but indulge in some Schadenfreude at this turn of events. REFERENCE: Freedom of the press BY Yasser Latif Hamdani May 05, 2014 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/opinion/05-May-2014/freedom-of-the-press Murder in Pakistan - Leaders should stand up and rally the country against the forces of intolerance EDITORIAL Jan 5, 2011 22:38 http://arabnews.com/opinion/article229917.ece

Taliban Journalist of Jang Group Justify Salmaan Taseer Murder (GEO TV 2011)



Taliban Journalist of Jang Group Justify... by SalimJanMazari

Note the angling by the Jang Group, The News, GEO TV and Hamid Mir before and after Salmaan Taseer's tragic assassination  

Liberal extremism vs religious extremism — both are wrong BY Hamid Mir Tuesday, January 11, 2011 ISLAMABAD: It’s very difficult for me to write about Salmaan Taseer, the assassinated Punjab Governor. Once he was a good friend and later he became a ferocious enemy. He spoke against me and against Geo TV on many television shows as the governor and I wrote against him many times in the last couple of years because he had joined hands with dictator Pervez Musharraf after the imposition of emergency on November 3, 2007. I was standing with the deposed chief justice of Pakistan and Taseer tried to stop the restoration of deposed judges, first by helping Musharraf and then by helping President Asif Ali Zardari. Musharraf appointed him the governor of Punjab in May 2008 with the hope that Taseer will convince Zardari to accept the former dictator as the president for five years. Musharraf was wrong. Zardari ultimately forced him to resign and occupied the Presidency with the help of Taseer. Within a few days of becoming the President, Zardari arranged my meeting with Taseer and forced us to forget our past differences because Zardari was aware that we enjoyed a friendship of 20 years (from 1987 to 2007). Unfortunately, President Zardari failed to remove the mistrust between his governor and a journalist. We embarrassed the President of Pakistan. In the next two years, we spoke against each other many times, especially when Zardari imposed the Governor’s Rule in the Punjab to suppress the movement for the restoration of deposed judges. Zardari and Taseer failed to stop that movement and finally they were forced to restore the judges. My differences with President Zardari and Taseer were over after that. Thanks to the floods last year, Taseer showed a big heart and made truce with me. It was August 2010 when Taseer surprised me. He saw me in the flood affected area of Multan and sent a message of reconciliation through his media adviser Farrukh Shah. I accepted because I was impressed that the governor was trying his best to help the flood victims. 

We had tea together after many years. He praised my visits to the flooded areas in boats and I praised his commitment to the flood victims. Taseer wanted to discuss many things but I was going to Muzaffargarh with Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani. We talked and laughed and then I said goodbye to him with a promise to meet him again in Lahore. I saw him again in the reception for the Chinese premier in Islamabad. Just one day before his assassination, I was in Lahore and tried to contact him. I wanted his views on the gas loadshedding in the Punjab. I was informed that he was in Islamabad. The next day, I arrived back in Islamabad and in late afternoon my colleague Rana Jawad told me that Taseer was shot in front of my favorite restaurant in the capital. I was stunned but then I smiled. I told my colleague “Taseer is a hard nut to crack, he will survive.” My colleague said that only a miracle could save him because Taseer got more than one bullet in his neck. Now I was nervous. After a few minutes, I came to know that a police guard had fired more than 27 bullets on Taseer. He was angry with Taseer because he took a position against the country’s blasphemy laws. There was no justification for any individual to kill someone just for criticising a law. I was more disturbed when I started receiving SMS in support of his killer the same evening. Many religious leaders refused to condemn the assassination of Taseer. 

I took it as a challenge and decided to get condemnation from the head of the biggest religious party of the country — Jamiat Ulema Islam chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman. I contacted him on phone on my television show and just asked, “Will you condemn the murder of Salmaan Taseer?” I was surprised when Maulana Sahib tried to avoid my question. He was not in a mood to condemn the murder but I was repeating my question again and again. Finally, the Maulana Sahib condemned the murder of Taseer. It was not my victory. It was the victory of all those who believed in the teachings of founder of Pakistan Muhammad Ali Jinnah. He believed in the rule of law. No individual has the right to become a judge and punish someone without hearing his point of view. When I finished my show, many extremists started threatening me. But I was not alone. A big majority of my colleagues encouraged me, including the critics of Taseer. More than 500 religious clerics issued a statement in support of the assassin and declared that no Muslim should participate in his funeral prayers because the late governor was trying to release a Christian woman convicted under the blasphemy case. This statement came from the anti-Taliban Barelvi scholars, who lost their leaders like Mufti Safaraz Naeemi at the hands of the Taliban in 2009. All the top religious scholars of the Lahore city refused to lead the funeral prayers of Taseer, including the prayer leader of the mosque in the Governor House of Lahore. The Barelvi Ulema took a very extreme position. On the other side, some English newspapers declared that blasphemy law was the main cause for the killing of Taseer. It was also an extreme position. It is a very difficult situation for the host of a popular TV talk show. I took another risk. On the day of the funeral, I interviewed another important Islamic scholar Mufti Muneebur Rehman, who expressed his condolences with the family of Taseer. Mufti Muneeb belongs to the Barelvi school of thought. He was one of the first Islamic scholars who came out openly against the suicide bombings of Taliban in my TV show five years ago. Mufti Muneeb also opposed Taseer’s views on the blasphemy laws but he never approved the murder of Taseer. I was relieved after the statement of Mufti Muneeb. At least, someone from religious clergy came out openly against the killing. I think Salmaan Taseer was a misunderstood person. His son Aatish Taseer portrayed his father as an enemy of Jews and Hindus in his writings just because Taseer left his Indian Sikh mother Talveen Singh in 1980. In fact, Taseer represented the western way of life in his private life but Aatish wrongly accused his father for having a religious hatred against the Jews and Hindus. The assassin of Taseer also had a wrong impression about Taseer and he killed him as an enemy of Islam. Aatish Taseer and the assassin, Malik Mumtaz Qadri, represent two different extremes. One is a liberal extremist who leveled unfounded charges against his father. The other is a religious extremist. I am sure that both these two extremes are very dangerous for our values. We must fight both, the religious extremists and the liberal extremists. 

I must say that the ruling Pakistan People’s Party is also responsible for Taseer’s death. When Taseer criticised the blasphemy laws, his own party, including President Zardari, never took a stand for him. Law Minister Babar Awan said that nobody would be allowed to make a change in the blasphemy laws. The views of Taseer were misunderstood because the US is also demanding that Pakistan repeal the blasphemy laws. The common Pakistanis don’t like the US interference and that was why Taseer was declared an American agent by many rightwing parties. We can compare this controversy with the cases of Binayak Sen and Arundhati Roy in India. They are facing sedition charges because they are outspoken like Salmaan Taseer and they are hated by the right wing like Taseer. They are facing death threats and they are supported by the US and unfortunately the support from the US is definitely a disadvantage in South Asia. Personally, I also believe that there is no need to change the blasphemy laws right now because these laws were passed by our parliament in 1992 and we cannot afford new controversies these days. Prime Minister Gilani has written in his autobiography published in 2006 that the late Benazir Bhutto was also an opponent of changing the blasphemy laws. But we must not allow a person to kill another person just for criticising these laws. Freedom of expression is assured in Article 19 of the Constitution of Pakistan. I think that human rights bodies must fight the case of poor Christian woman convicted in blasphemy in the high court and the Supreme Court. They should not force the President of Pakistan to announce a pardon because it will create further divisions in our society. We must resolve our problems through the rule of law. Religious parties once again showed their street power on January 9 in Karachi in support of the blasphemy laws. Interestingly, Sunni and Shia scholars never condoned the murder of Taseer but they were together in defending the blasphemy laws. The Punjab Assembly showed maturity on Monday by condemning the murder of Salmaan Taseer. I think that blasphemy law is a safety valve against violence but I also believe that we must condemn the murder of Salmaan Taseer. Now some PPP leaders are trying to put the blame of his assassination on the PML-N. This is dirty politics. We need unity to fight extremism. I am sure we can defeat extremism not with the help of US but with the help of our own values based on tolerance. We need a made-in-Pakistan solution for fighting terrorism and extremism. A made in US solution will completely destroy us. REFERENCE: We need a ‘made-in-Pakistan’ solution for fighting terrorism - Liberal extremism vs religious extremism — both are wrong BY Hamid Mir Tuesday, January 11, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-3234-We-need-a-made-in-Pakistan-solution-for-fighting-terrorism Hamid Mir on Asia Bibi & Blasphemy Law & Salmaan Taseer Thursday, November 25, 2010 in Jang Group, The News and GEO TV as well http://jang.com.pk/jang/nov2010-daily/25-11-2010/col4.htm Thursday, October 13, 2011, Ziqad 14, 1432 A.H. http://jang.com.pk/jang/oct2011-daily/13-10-2011/col2.htm

Jang Group on the Death of Osama Bin Laden (Capital Talk 02 May 2011)



Jang Group on the Death of Osama Bin Laden... by SalimJanMazari

Liberal fascism? Hamid Mir Tuesday, November 03, 2009 Jonah Goldberg is a columnist for The Los Angeles Times. He recently wrote a book on liberal fascism. He started his book with Mussolini who was the father of fascism in Italy. Jonah also discussed American liberalism as a new totalitarian political religion very close to fascism. Finally Jonah Goldberg declared Hillary Clinton as "The First Lady of Liberal Fascism." Jonah avoided using the term of liberal fascist for President Barack Obama but he feared that America was slowly becoming a fascist country. It was difficult for me to believe that Hillary could be a fascist because she is a fascinating person. I read the book just a few days ago when I was travelling from the US to Pakistan. Luckily I got a chance to meet Hillary Clinton during her official visit to Pakistan on the evening of Oct 28 at the Islamabad residence of the US ambassador. I was one of the six TV anchors invited for a candid talk with the secretary of state. She was very much concerned about the bad image of her country in Pakistan and she said that "we must listen to each other and we must be honest with each other." I put just three short questions to Hillary Clinton. My first question was about the rule of law. I referred to the Kerry-Lugar bill in which the US expressed desire for the rule of law in Pakistan and humbly asked why US officials were breaking Pakistani laws again and again in Islamabad. I informed her that four US marines were arrested at 3 a.m. on Oct 27 in Islamabad with illegal weapons in their hands. They were released within one hour of their arrest. I asked: "Who ordered them to patrol the roads of Islamabad? Will you allow Pakistani soldiers to patrol the roads of Washington DC with weapons in their hands?" Hillary said that diplomats enjoyed immunity and they carried weapons. I again informed her that diplomats did not come out on the roads at three in the morning. She said: "I will look into this matter." I was not satisfied with her answer. She told us that the US wanted a strong and vibrant democracy in Pakistan. I again asked her that if the US cared too much about democracy, then why it didn't care about the unanimous resolution of our new parliament against US drones attacks. I said, "Instead of listening to the voice of democracy coming through our parliament you have increased drone attacks which means that you have no respect for our democracy." Once again she just said, "We have to win the war against terror and we have to support democracy in Pakistan." My third question was about the American desire for civilian control on the security establishment of Pakistan expressed in the Kerry-Lugar bill many times. I asked, "Do you want a civilian to head the ISI?" She never said no, but explained, "We can have a head of the CIA both from military and civilians and you can also have the head of the ISI from military and civilians." The answer clearly gave a message that the US wants a civilian to head the premier intelligence agency of Pakistan. Hillary Clinton never said anything new to us. When I was coming back after meeting her I was thinking about Liberal Fascism written by Jonah Goldberg. Hillary Clinton must give clear and straight answers to the questions burning in the minds of common Pakistanis. Otherwise, we will be forced to believe that she is taking America into a new era of liberal fascism. REFERENCE: Liberal fascism? Hamid Mir Tuesday, November 03, 2009 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=206525&Cat=9&dt=11/4/2009 Hamid Mir Daily Jang Thursday, January 20, 2011 http://jang.com.pk/jang/jan2011-daily/20-01-2011/col5.htm

Jang Group , The News and GEO TV and their Journalists played Ugliest role during Memogate Scandal but Hamid Mir in the Garb of Attacking Mansoor Ijaz, attacked the most marginalized Minority in Pakistan Hamid Mir Target Minorities via Jang Group 26 January 2012. In 2009, the same Hamid Mir had alleged that a Secret Cell is being run by Husain Haqqani in the President House against Army and the Media.

Taliban Journalist of Jang Group VS Bloggers (Capital Talk 5th Nov 2009)

Taliban Journalist of Jang Group VS Bloggers... by SalimJanMazari

The man who played with four govts . Mansoor Ejaz once urged Benazir to recognise Israel BY Hamid Mir  ISLAMABAD: Once again Islamabad is ripe with rumours that the PPP-led coalition government might not survive till March 2012 but President Asif Ali Zardari is not worried. He does not see any “extra-constitutional” threat to his government because he thinks there is no reason for the Army to take over. He recently told his friends that the political government and Army leaders have no differences over issues relating to foreign policy and security but even then some diehard critics say the countdown has begun. The rumours spread fast after the publication of an article in the Financial Times by Mansoor Ejaz who claimed President Zardari had sent a secret memo to the White House through Admiral Mike Mullen immediately after the killing of Osama bin Laden in the Abbottabad operation on May 2. President Zardari allegedly informed the US officials that his government was under threat from the Army and the US must stop General Kayani from taking over. According to the article President Zardari also promised to make some major changes in the Army and ISI leadership. Many opposition politicians raised questions about the alleged secret memo when this article was published but the Presidency remained silent. Many friends and colleagues advised President Zardari to issue a contradiction but he said: “let them spread the dirt for some days; we must know who is friend and who is foe?” Farhatullah Babar, the presidential spokesman, informally contradicted Mansoor Ejaz’s claim but he was not ready to say anything on the record. One intelligence agency informed the government that this “memo controversy” was part of an international conspiracy to create differences between political and military leadership of Pakistan. In the meantime US secretary of state Hillary Clinton during her recent visit met a group of journalists in Islamabad. One of our colleagues Mazhar Abbas asked her about the secret memo but she neither contradicted nor confirmed. Her careful response was a bombshell for many in the government. More articles with more speculations started appearing in the Pakistani media. Rumourmongers confused many seasoned politicians. One federal minister from a coalition party decided to speak against his own government in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. That was when the Foreign Office decided to issue a formal contradiction. Next day the President’s spokesperson also broke his silence on the issue and said that “Mansoor Ejaz’s allegation is nothing more than a desperate bid by an individual whom recognition and credibility has eluded, to seek media attention through concocted stories”. Farhatullah Babar further said: “why would the President of Pakistan choose a private person of questionable credentials to carry a letter to US officials? Since when Mansoor has become a courier of messages of the President of Pakistan?” He recalled that 16 years ago during the visit of late Benazir Bhutto to US Mansoor Ejaz wanted to see her. Farhatullah Babar was press secretary to the PM at that time. He mentioned the name of Mansoor to Benazir Bhutto and she said: “Mansoor is not to be trusted”. Late Benazir Bhutto advised her Press Secretary to “stay away from Mansoor Ejaz” but he never mentioned these words in his denial issued on October 29. Mansoor Ejaz also issued a statement in response in which he said: “I have the facts, all the facts. Every word I say or write is backed with hard evidence and proof. Challenging me on that would be a grave mistake” since “the evidence is crystal clear”. Background interviews with well-informed officials in Islamabad and conversations with top Pakistani diplomats in Washington and London revealed some more information. This is not the first time Mansoor Ejaz has created a problem for the PPP government. He did so in 1995 when tried to meet Benazir Bhutto through Zafar Hilali who was then working with the prime minister. He informed Hilali that Yusuf Haroon was hatching a conspiracy against the government with the help of some Army officials. Hilali asked him to write all these things in black and white. Mansoor Ejaz wrote a letter to Benazir Bhutto on June 29, 1995 claiming that the then Director General of Military Intelligence Ali Quli Khan was hatching a conspiracy to overthrow her government with the help of Yusuf Haroon. He offered his services for lobbying in the US Congress. He also proposed that Pakistan must recognise Israel and US will write off all its foreign debt. Benazir Bhutto spoke to Army chief General Abdul Waheed Kakar and informed him about the allegations made by Mansoor Ejaz against General Ali Quli Khan. Kakar initiated an inquiry but nothing was proved. After some weeks Ali Quli Khan reported to Kakar about a coup plan made by some hardliners and arrested many officers including a Major General. A few months later Benazir Bhutto visited New York to address the UN General Assembly. This writer was part of the delegation as a journalist. Mansoor Ejaz tried to meet Benazir Bhutto and Asif Ali Zardari. She not only refused to meet him she even advised the journalists accompanying her “never to meet this person”. Mansoor Ejaz claims he persuaded US Vice President Al Gore to say that a military coup against democratic government will not be accepted. Al Gore said this in a reception organised by a Pakistani-American Rashid Chaudhry in Washington. Rashid Chaudhry has requested Benazir Bhutto not to send the former ambassador to that reception but someone more trust-worthy. She sent Wajid Shamsul Hasan. Mansoor Ejaz met Wajid Shamsul Hasan but the latter told Benazir Bhutto “we must not trust him”. Mansoor Ejaz tried to become a lobbyist for Pakistan but the then Pakistan’s ambassador in Washington, Maleeha Lodhi, raised many questions about his credibility and then Mansoor Ejaz started writing articles against Benazir Bhutto in the Wall Street Journal. Benazir Bhutto said privately many times in those days that he was a double agent working for Israel and also for some people in the ISI. In October 1996 the Pakistan Embassy in Washington accused Mansoor Ejaz of writing against the PPP government because he was denied 15 million dollars he had demanded to deliver votes in the US House of Representatives in support of the Brown Amendment. The embassy also said that Mansoor Ejaz had been pushing the PPP government to recognise Israel and he himself visited Israel on several occasions, once on the invitation of Jerusalem’s mayor. The embassy mentioned that he was given ‘humanitarian of the year’ award by a major Jewish organisation “for establishing clinics and schools in Belgium and in many parts of the Eastern Europe for the Jewish communities. Pakistan’s Ambassador to the UN Ahmad Kamal was close to Mansoor Ejaz but then Foreign Secretary Najmudin Sheikh addressed a press conference against him and declared his articles “vindictive and without credibility”. After the dismissal of Benazir Bhutto’s government by President Farooq Leghari in November 1996 Mansoor Ejaz became very close to some ministers of the Nawaz Sharif government, which was installed in 1997. He even claimed to act as a middleman between US and Sudan and then between Pakistan and India in 2000 on behalf of US President Bill Clinton. He visited the Indian Army headquarters in Srinagar and then came to Islamabad for a meeting with the ISI officials who ignored him but one day he was able to informally meet General Pervez Musharraf through his mother. He entered in Army House to meet Musharraf’s mother but succeeded in having a brief chitchat with the military dictator. Musharraf at that time was diplomatically isolated ruler but he too never trusted Mansoor Ejaz due to his close links with some PML-N leaders. After meeting Musharraf he met Hizbul Mujahedeen chief Syed Salahudin in Islamabad through a Jamat-e-Islami leader and tried to deliver him an alleged letter from US President Bill Clinton but the Kashmiri militant leader never accepted that letter. Mansoor tried to give an impression to both Islamabad and Delhi that he was an unofficial negotiator of President Clinton. When the Indian government approached Washington about the credentials of Mansoor Ejaz some senior Clinton administration officials clarified publicly that Mansoor Ejaz was not given any mandate to act as a negotiator in the Kashmir dispute. After 9/11 Mansoor Ejaz tried to interact with both CIA and Taliban. He sent messages to Taliban through a retired ISI official and offered his services for mediation between Taliban and the US but his efforts never materialised because Taliban were not ready to hand over Osama bin Laden to US. After the change of command in the ISI the new DG ISI General Ehsanul Haq denied him access to all the government circles. He tried to become partner of a newspaper owner but failed. He remained silent for many years and then wrote an article in the Christian Science Monitor after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto on December 28, 2007 in which he said: “I knew Benazir Bhutto well. I am often blamed by her supporters for having helped bring her government down in 1996 by exposing her hypocrisy and corruption in two Wall Street Journal Op-Ed pieces”. His words raise the question that how can President Asif Ali Zardari trust him and why would he send a secret memo through a person who wrote against him and his wife many times? It is obvious now that President Zardari neither met him recently nor spoke to him on telephone. Mansoor Ejaz is claiming that one top diplomat was instrumental in the making of the alleged memo and he can prove that whatever he wrote in the memo was approved by the top diplomat. PTI Chief Imran Khan claimed in the Lahore rally that it was Pakistan Ambassador in US Hussain Haqqani who gave this memo to Mansoor Ejaz. Hussain Haqqani denies that. He says that when he can talk to Admiral Mike Mullen directly why would he use a person like Mansoor Ejaz to send a secret memo? Some government sources suspected that maybe Mansoor Ejaz had spoken to Ambassador Haqqani on phone after the May 2 incident and recorded his conversation with him but he cannot present that recording as evidence because it is an offence under the US law. These sources accuse the PML-N of being part of the conspiracy because some PML-N leaders enjoy friendly relations with Mansoor Ejaz sine late 90’s. Sources close to Mansoor Ejaz claim that the PPP government is inviting big trouble by denying the memo. They say Mansoor Ejaz is an American citizen and he would not like to be involved in Pakistani politics but he is ready to produce the evidence in any Pakistani court of law if required. Mansoor Ejaz is playing with the fourth Pakistani government in the last 16 years. It seems that someone tried to play with someone through Mansoor Ejaz but this clever person has created a big trouble for a small-time power player. President Zardari may not lose anything in this whole controversy but Mansoor Ejaz is capable of destroying the credibility of the diplomat who spoke to him on phone or sent him some email. One PPP insider claimed that Mansoor Ejaz has special hatred for PPP. He belongs to a sect that was declared non-Muslim by the Pakistani Parliament when Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was the prime minister. That is why he has always tried to punish PPP through his conspiracies. The insider claimed that President Zardari has no problem with General Kayani. President Zardari wrote an article in Washington Post on May 3, 2011 and defended his intelligence agencies by saying “a decade of cooperation and partnership between the US and Pakistan led up to the elimination of Osama bin Laden and we in Pakistan take some satisfaction that our early assistance in identifying an Al Qaeda courier ultimately led to this day”. After five months President Zardari again wrote in Washington Post on October 1 and said: “must we fight alone in our region all those that others now seek to embrace? And how long can we degrade our capacity by fighting an enemy that the might of NATO’s global coalition has failed to eliminate?” PPP sources insisted that Mansoor Ejaz tried to create differences between army and the president and also tried to create misunderstanding between Pakistan and US but he has miserably failed. The PPP leaders play down the delay in contradicting the alleged secret memo from President Zardari to President Obama. But this delay was not a mistake but a blunder, which forced many in Pakistan to believe that the secret memo was true. REFERENCE: The man who played with four govts . Mansoor Ejaz once urged Benazir to recognise Israel BY Hamid Mir Wednesday, November 02, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=10015&Cat=13

Perpetual Confusion of Hamid Mir
on Blasphemy Law Thursday November 01 2012

In 2001 Hamid Mir filed a report in Daily Dawn Pakistan that Osama Bin Laden had Nuclear Bombs (as if these are peanuts and then Abbottabad happened in 2011. Isn't it funny that Jang Group, GEO TV, The News love Osama Bin Laden and Saudi Arabia both and least bothered to read Saudi Religious Edict of Apostasy against Osama Bin Laden .

Jang Group on the Life of Osama Bin Laden - 1 (Capital Talk 5 May 2011)



Jang Group on the Life of Osama Bin Laden - 1... by SalimJanMazari

Saudi Fatwa on Usaamah Ibn Laadin Al Khaarijee http://www.scribd.com/doc/98399399/Saudi-Fatwa-on-Usaamah-Ibn-Laadin-Al-Khaarijee

Saudi Fatwa on Usaamah Ibn Laadin Al Khaarijee by Aamir Mughal

Jang Group on the Life of Osama Bin Laden - 2 (Capital Talk 5 May 2011)



Jang Group on the Life of Osama Bin Laden - 2... by SalimJanMazari

Nov 10, 2001 Osama claims he has nukes: If US uses N-arms it will get same response KABUL, Nov 9: Osama bin Laden has said that “we have chemical and nuclear weapons as a deterrent and if America used them against us we reserve the right to use them”. He said this in a special interview with Hamid Mir, the editor of Ausaf, for Dawn and Ausaf, at an undisclosed location near Kabul. This was the first interview given by Osama to any journalist after the September 11 attacks in New York and Washington. The correspondent was taken blindfolded in a jeep from Kabul on the night of Nov 7 to a place where it was extremely cold and one could hear the sound of anti-aircraft guns firing away. After a wait of some time , Osama arrived with about a dozen bodyguards and Dr Ayman Al-Zuwahiri and answered questions.

 Hamid Mir: After American bombing on Afghanistan on Oct 7, you told the Al-Jazeera TV that the Sept 11 attacks had been carried out by some Muslims. How did you know they were Muslims ?

 Osama bin Laden: The Americans themselves released a list of the suspects of the Sept 11 attacks, saying that the persons named were involved in the attacks. They were all Muslims, of whom 15 belonged to Saudi Arabia, two were from the UAE and one from Egypt. According to the information I have, they were all passengers.Fateha was held for them in their homes. But America said they were hijackers.

 HM: In your statement of Oct 7, you expressed satisfaction over the Sept 11 attacks, although a large number of innocent people perished in them, hundreds among them were Muslims. Can you justify the killing of innocent men in the light of Islamic teachings ?

 OBL: This is a major point in jurisprudence. In my view, if an enemy occupies a Muslim territory and uses common people as human shield, then it is permitted to attack that enemy. For instance, if bandits barge into a home and hold a child hostage, then the child’s father can attack the bandits and in that attack even the child may get hurt. America and its allies are massacring us in Palestine, Chechenya, Kashmir and Iraq. The Muslims have the right to attack America in reprisal. The Islamic Shariat says Muslims should not live in the land of the infidel for long. The Sept 11 attacks were not targeted at women and children. The real targets were America’s icons of military and economic power. The Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) was against killing women and children. When he saw a dead woman during a war, he asked why was she killed ? If a child is above 13 and wields a weapon against Muslims, then it is permitted to kill him. The American people should remember that they pay taxes to their government, they elect their president, their government manufactures arms and gives them to Israel and Israel uses them to massacre Palestinians. The American Congress endorses all government measures and this proves that the entire America is responsible for the atrocities perpetrated against Muslims. The entire America, because they elect the Congress. I ask the American people to force their government to give up anti-Muslim policies. The American people had risen against their government’s war in Vietnam. They must do the same today. The American people should stop the massacre of Muslims by their government.

 HM: Can it be said that you are against the American government, not the American people ?

 OSB: Yes! We are carrying on the mission of our Prophet, Muhammad (peace be upon him). The mission is to spread the word of God, not to indulge massacring people. We ourselves are the target of killings, destruction and atrocities. We are only defending ourselves. This is defensive Jihad. We want to defend our people and our land. That is why I say that if we don’t get security, the Americans, too would not get security. This is a simple formula that even an American child can understand. This is the formula of live and let live.

 HM: The head of Egypt’s Jamia Al-Azhar has issued a fatwa (edict) against you, saying that the views and beliefs of Osama bin Laden have nothing to do with Islam. What do you have to say about that ?

 OSB: The fatwa of any official Aalim has no value for me. History is full of such Ulema who justify Riba, who justify the occupation of Palestine by the Jews, who justify the presence of American troops around Harmain Sharifain. These people support the infidels for their personal gain.The true Ulema support the Jihad against America. Tell me if Indian forces invaded Pakistan what would you do? The Israeli forces occupy our land and the American troops are on our territory. We have no other option but to launch Jihad.

 HM: Some Western media claim that you are trying to acquire chemical and nuclear weapons. How much truth is there in such reports?

 OSB: I heard the speech of American President Bush yesterday (Oct 7). He was scaring the European countries that Osama wanted to attack with weapons of mass destruction. I wish to declare that if America used chemical or nuclear weapons against us, then we may retort with chemical and nuclear weapons. We have the weapons as deterrent.

 HM: Where did you get these weapons from ?

 OSB: Go to the next question.

 HM: Demonstrations are being held in many European countries against American attacks on Afghanistan. Thousands of the protesters were non-Muslims. What is your opinion about those non-Muslim protesters ?

 OSB: There are many innocent and good-hearted people in the West. American media instigates them against Muslims. However, some good-hearted people are protesting against American attacks because human nature abhors injustice. The Muslims were massacred under the UN patronage in Bosnia. I am ware that some officers of the State Department had resigned in protest. Many years ago the US ambassador in Egypt had resigned in protest against the policies of President Jimmy Carter. Nice and civilized are everywhere. The Jewish lobby has taken America and the West hostage.

 HM: Some people say that war is no solution to any issue. Do you think that some political formula could be found to stop the present war ?

 OSB: You should put this question to those who have started this war. We are only defending ourselves.

 HM: If America got out of Saudi Arabia and the Al-Aqsa mosque was liberated, would you then present yourself for trial in some Muslim country ?

 OSB: Only Afghanistan is an Islamic country. Pakistan follows the English law. I don’t consider Saudi Arabia an Islamic country. If the Americans have charges against me, we too have a charge sheet against them.

 HM: Pakistan government decided to cooperate with America after Sept 11, which you don’t consider right. What do you think Pakistan should have done but to cooperate with America ?

 OSB: The government of Pakistan should have the wishes of the people in view. It should not have surrendered to the unjustified demands of America. America does not have solid proof against us. It just has some surmises. It is unjust to start bombing on the basis of those surmises.

 HM: Had America decided to attack Pakistan with the help of India and Israel, what would have we done ?

OSB: What has America achieved by attacking Afghanistan ? We will not leave the Pakistani people and the Pakistani territory at anybody’s mercy. We will defend Pakistan. But we have been disappointed by Gen Pervez Musharraf. He says that the majority is with him. I say the majority is against him. Bush has used the word crusade. This is a crusade declared by Bush. It is no wisdom to barter off blood of Afghan brethren to improve Pakistan’s economy. He will be punished by the Pakistani people and Allah. Right now a great war of Islamic history is being fought in Afghanistan. All the big powers are united against Muslims. It is ‘ sawab ‘ to participate in this war.

 HM: A French newspaper has claimed that you had kidney problem and had secretly gone to Dubai for treatment last year. Is that correct ?

 OSB: My kidneys are all right. I did not go to Dubai last year. One British newspaper has published an imaginary interview with Islamabad dateline with one of my sons who lives in Saudi Arabia. All this is false.

 HM: Is it correct that a daughter of Mulla Omar is your wife or your daughter is Mulla Omar’s wife ?

 OSB: (Laughs). All my wives are Arabs ( and all my daughters are married to Arab Mujahideen). I have spiritual relationship with Mulla Omar. He is a great and brave Muslim of this age. He does not fear anyone but Allah. He is not under any personal relationship or obligation to me. He is only discharging his religious duty. I, too, have not chosen this life out of any personal consideration. REFERENCE: Osama claims he has nukes: If US uses N-arms it will get same response Updated Nov 10, 2001 12:00am BY Hamid Mir http://www.dawn.com/news/5647/osama-claims-he-has-nukes-if-us-uses-n-arms-it-will-get-same-response

Media and Civil Military Equations in Pakistan - Ejaz Haider

That the March 28 attack in Lahore on journalist Raza Rumi was cowardly and highly condemnable is to state the obvious. Raza is a nonviolent, nonconfrontationist, evolved man who trades in ideas. Mild in manners, civilized in conversation, he stands his ground firmly but politely. There is no space in his universe for bombs and bullets. In fact, his entire effort as a writer, thinker, and speaker has been to return this country to a more evolved state where differences of opinion do not lead to killing. And yet, he is a target and has been for a while. In a country where we have seen much violence and where violence seems to be working in favor of those who perpetrate and perpetuate it, we tend to forget the power of ideas. Not the killers, though. They know that they cannot win until they have silenced everyone who speaks out against their creed, grounded in hate and exclusion. That’s why Raza was and is a threat to them. Raza survived the attack. He has been very lucky and we, his friends, can only thank God for that. His driver, whose only fault was to be at the wrong place at the wrong time, didn’t. I feel angry at such gratuitous violence, but anger must be tempered with thinking if we have to develop a response to such acts. The attack on Raza is not the first of its kind and given the kind of enemy we are dealing with, it won’t be the last either. So, what, if at all anything, can be done? First, we have to realize that no situation is entirely hopeless. This is not to say that we can deal with the whirlwind quickly, given how much effort we have put in in sowing the wind. But measures can be taken to address the situation. Currently, journalists are without any security or even training that can help them deal with such situations with any degree of confidence. Meanwhile, media houses have shown scant regard for their employees’ safety even as the threat has grown. They need to realize that it is not business as usual. People are now writing and speaking in an environment where their words can get them killed. It is insensitive and downright stupid for media houses to encourage people to speak freely and then do nothing to protect them. A TV channel’s responsibility doesn’t end after someone has left the studio. In fact, it extends to protecting the people whose words that channel broadcasts (and which words it profits from). And while it is the government’s responsibility to unearth groups attacking the media, the media houses themselves have to start investing in providing security to their staff. In such situations the organizations have to be mobilized to become co-producers of safety. Media organizations have to get insured against such threats, and begin to provide security to their staff onsite as well as offsite. The government can help by subsidizing the cost of these measures. Unfortunately, in saying this I have jumped ahead of another problem: the deadly pettiness that informs the ratings competition among media organizations. Such is the extent of this problem that, with the exception of Capital TV, the attack on Raza was blacked out by other channels. Will we, the working journalists, allow the small-minded nastiness of owners to continue to jeopardize our safety and security? I, for one, am not prepared to accept that. When the Express News van was attacked in Karachi, I wrote in this space that media houses need to close ranks and take concerted action. My point was that we must signal to these groups that if we are attacked, they will be blacked out, too. They thrive on the spectacle. The way to de-oxygenate them is to deprive them of that. It’s called shared pain. But that requires unity. That unity has been killed by the owners, not the working journalists. Before we hit out at the government, we need to kick our respective organizations into burying their grudges. Media bodies and organizations around the world have done much work on what measures can be taken to reduce the threat. We can share those best practices but only if we can get our organizations to stand as one to counter the threat. REFERENCE: When Words Can Kill by Ejaz Haider MAR 30 2014 http://newsweekpakistan.com/when-words-can-kill/

Attack on Pakistani Blogger, Journalist and Author Raza Rumi.

 

Attack on Pakistani Blogger, Journalist and... by SalimJanMazari

I have never been particularly enamored of Mir’s positions and style of journalism, but the principle is more important than the differences one might have with him. No matter what, you do not attack a journalist or anyone who uses nonviolent means for expression. Some critics will say that words are not without consequences. I remember, after the killing of Khalid Khawaja, when I spoke with his son, Osama, for a story for Newsweek, he told me in no uncertain words that he thought his father’s murder was instigated by Mir. When I called Mir to ask him about his alleged telephone conversation with the militant Usman Punjabi in which they discussed Khawaja, Mir denied the voice on the recording was his. Be that as it may, there are laws in this country to punish those whose words can incite violence. Even more importantly, when you try to assassinate someone, you close the door on assessment because then the principle takes over and one has to withhold objective assessment to uphold the principle. No one has the right to sentence someone to death without a trial. When states and societies begin killing critics extra-judicially, they go out of joint. That creates a bigger problem. And, finally, a word on the media houses: The trend toward being small-minded has been set by The Jang Group, where Mir works, and that template is followed by others. I was hoping that Express News and ARY would shame Jang’s Geo News by breaking that template and reporting the attempt on Mir. I was wrong. The pathology of small-mindedness continues even as working journalists continue to be attacked. Reference: (Talking) Heads on a Spike APR 20 2014 by Ejaz Haider http://newsweekpakistan.com/talking-heads-on-a-spike/

Attack on Hamid Mir or Freedom of Expression (Bay Laag 21 April 2014)

 

Attack on Hamid Mir or Freedom of Expression... by SalimJanMazari

It took two lines toward the end of the Inter-Services Public Relations’ press release for the ruling Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) to scurry for cover. The talk shows that followed the shot fired by the Army chief, Gen. Raheel Sharif, across the bow of the government saw the defense minister meekly trying to defend himself. Two other ministers could also be seen diving for the crawl trench after that somewhat ‘innocuous’ statement. While the government was recovering from the Army’s warning shot, Pakistan’s media behemoth, The Jang Group, decided, in the wake of a murder attempt on one of its prominent anchors, Hamid Mir, to go on an offensive against the Inter-Services Intelligence directorate and its director-general. The Geo News screen, the heavy artillery of the group, continued to pound the ISI for hours on April 19. It seemed that Pakistan’s biggest media group had decided to take on the powerful military and its premier intelligence agency where the government had tucked its tail and run. Initially, while Geo delivered its salvos, there was no return fire from the military. Then it started happening. This is how the story goes. The military used a three-pronged approach. It coopted rival channels and newspapers to fire back at Geo. Its supporters used Twitter and Facebook in its favor and against Jang/Geo, and the ISI sent an application to the Ministry of Defense seeking redress against the media group’s offensive, asking that Geo News be taken off air by the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA). While the defense ministry processed the application, the other two approaches were kept hot by the military. There was an exponential increase in trolling against Geo on Twitter from patently fake accounts. Facebook pages kept pressing for banning the group and there was enhanced mass-email traffic against the group. The key strike point of all this activity was to prove that the group took its instructions from hostile external forces, has an agenda set by such forces, and has long been indulging in activities prejudicial to the national interest. Similar accusations were contained in the ISI application, which was routed through the defense ministry to PEMRA, which has since issued a show-cause notice to the group in keeping with the provisions of its regulatory charter. The ISI application, marked “Secret,” a copy of which is with this scribe, also stressed this point as the reason for banning the group. However, while the application asked that Geo be taken off air pending the completion of a PEMRA inquiry, that has not happened because PEMRA cannot, under its own rules, do that. Meanwhile, the Geo screen has mysteriously disappeared wholly or partially from some cantonments in the country. Reference: War of Narratives by Ejaz Haider APR 27 2014 http://newsweekpakistan.com/war-of-narratives/

Sacred Institutions & Existence of Others (Bay Laag – 22nd April 2014)

 

Sacred Institutions & Existence of Others (Bay... by SalimJanMazari

An inquiry from the defense ministry revealed that while there is no written directive to this end, officers and jawans in some places might have objected to the airing of an ‘anti-national’ channel. One doesn’t have to put an exclamation sign before the sentence to indicate what it means. The show-cause notice has its hearing on May 6, when it will be decided if the group will be penalized. The ISI application has called for the cancellation of the group’s license. At the time of writing, the situation seems grim and there is no indication that the military wants to take any prisoners. What does one make of this situation? Leaving aside the absurdities contained in the accusation that the group is acting on an anti-national agenda, this is yet another episode in the war in this country between the civilians and the military. In fact, the stress on national interest, if such a stress is to be taken seriously, indicates there might be different and competing conceptions of national interest. The point is that while the military might invoke a certain conception of national interest to bulldoze opposition–which it is known for doing–its desire to remain a dominant player is underpinned by a multiplicity of interests and not some grand, monolithic interest with a capital “I.” There is a cycle here: it remains dominant because it controls the narrative, but it must continue to control the narrative to remain dominant. Over many years there has also been an osmotic effect with this narrative seeping into other government organs and also sections of society. Ironically, while this narrative is ideological in nature, it is presented as a realist approach, which it is not. Two things have happened over the years. The military’s capacity for upfront action has reduced (though not fully dissipated) but its desire to retain its dominance has not diminished. Put another way, while the military will refrain from getting into the driver’s seat directly, it nonetheless wants the bus to remain on the course it has charted. The hammer has been replaced with a scalpel, though the hammer option hasn’t entirely gone away. Ten or perhaps 15 years ago, Geo would have faced something more than just a notice. But the military’s constraints in using the direct-fire option have not prevented it from using indirect fire and effectively. There’s good news in this and bad. The good news is that we do finally have other centers of power which cannot be bulldozed with impunity. Reference: War of Narratives by Ejaz Haider APR 27 2014 http://newsweekpakistan.com/war-of-narratives/

Ayesha Siddiqa, Ejaz Haider on Civil Military Relations in Pakistan with Nasim Zehra

 

Ayesha Siddiqa, Ejaz Haider on Civil Military... by SalimJanMazari

To soothe Mr Ayaz Amir, Mr Ejaz Haider quoted history: Excerpts of the conversation between Gen Musharraf and Lt Gen Aziz June 11, 1999 http://www.rediff.com/news/1999/jun/11talk.htm

Ayesha Siddiqa, Ejaz Haider on Civil Military Relations in Pakistan with Nasim Zehra

 

Ayesha Siddiqa, Ejaz Haider on Civil Military... by SalimJanMazari

The bad news is that we now have a military that is getting adept at playing in a new terrain and has learnt to be nimble-footed. General Sharif’s signal to the civilian government came just two days ahead of the Corps Commanders conference. It was meant to test the resolve of the civilian government ahead of that conference and it worked very well. On the Geo affair, the military has used the divisions within the media very effectively. In fact, rival channels and newspapers have played the national interest mantra so well that the Army doesn’t have to bang anyone on the head with it any more. This was easy to do. The undulated ground of Pakistani media has been created by Jang/Geo itself. For long, the group has bludgeoned its rivals. This is payback time for them and what better moment to do it than when the powerful military stands behind Geo’s rivals. If the military manages to get Geo’s license cancelled, these players, up until now no match to Geo, will have a field day. On the surface this looks like a good strategy. Except, it is not. If the military wins the round against Geo, rival channels will get bigger slices of the market for sure, but the freedom of expression they now have will be reduced to a sliver. They might still thrash everyone under the sun but the military will be off limits. In fact, the more everyone within the civilian enclave is beaten with a stick while the military remains shielded from any criticism, the higher it will sit atop Mount Olympus. Dragging it down and making it answerable to the people for its acts of commission and omission will become that much more difficult. For anyone interested in righting the civil-military imbalance in this country, that should be bad news. But market share and a sense of schadenfreude to see Jang/Geo bite the dust are likely to be very strong incentives for rival media houses to ignore the long-term consequences of playing ball with the military. Reference: War of Narratives by Ejaz Haider APR 27 2014 http://newsweekpakistan.com/war-of-narratives/

Media and Civil Military Imbalance in Pakistan by Dr Ayesha Siddiqa

For a state and society that has closely experienced military dictatorship, it appears odd to see it divided in its reaction to the failed assassination attempt on a prominent TV journalist, Hamid Mir of Geo News. Mir survived six bullets shot at him as he was on his way to his studio on April 19. The attack by gunmen on motorbikes was similar to the one on Raza Rumi in Lahore on March 28. The government's inability to assure security to Rumi has led to his exile from Pakistan. No longer is the targeting of journalists in Pakistan limited to the small reporter in the remote tribal area: it now happens to the big media-persons in the metros. While the police arrested militants of the banned group Lashkar-e-Jhanghvi for the attack on Rumi, there is no word about who tried to kill Mir. His brother Amir Mir immediately took to the TV cameras and said that the attack was carried out by Pakistan's all-powerful spy agency, the notorious Inter-Services Intelligence. Some argue that this incident isn't so unusual since journalists have been attacked several times before. Pakistan is considered one of the most dangerous places for journalists. According to Amnesty International, 34 journalists have been killed in the country since 2008. But strangely, there were many who did not approve of the decision by Mir's family to blame the ISI. Within hours, the ISI’s sympathisers came out in droves to lambast Geo. Several journalists reputed to be close to the military establishment launched a collective blitzkrieg against the Geo group accusing it of irresponsible behavior and endangering the country and its integrity. One anchor on a rival channel even called Mir Shakeel-ur-Rehman, the owner of Geo, a petty shopkeeper trying to malign the ISI for his petty interests. Others who joined in included the militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba’s Hafiz Saeed who declared this incident an Indian-American conspiracy. His network even took out processions in several cities in support of the army. Projects like Aman ki Asha run jointly in India and Pakistan by the Geo's parent organisation, the Jang group, and the Times of India are being treated as evidence of the Pakistani media group’s complicity in an alleged Indian plan to destroy the country. The main Jinnah Avenue in the capital Islamabad and many other places around the country were peppered with banners expressing people’s love for the army and the ISI. Some of these posters even said that anyone who opposed the ISI was a national traitor.

Ayesha Siddiqa, Ejaz Haider on Civil Military Relations in Pakistan with Nasim Zehra




Ayesha Siddiqa, Ejaz Haider on Civil Military... by SalimJanMazari


 The intriguing chessboard

 What’s intriguing about the entire case is the manner in which the chessboard is laid out. We see a situation where journalists considered staunchly right-wing are working for Geo and are critical of the ISI. Some of these are prominent names who have always supported the intelligence agency. In fact, many of them, including Hamid Mir himself, have produced several programmes accusing the previous Pakistan People’s Party-led government of trying to destroy the ISI. Clearly, the former loyalists are peeved with the agency’s attack on one of their own. Notwithstanding the shows that Hamid did on the Baluchistan insurgency or discussing Bangladesh, he was by no stretch of imagine ideologically poised against the military. One is even reminded of Mir publicly disclosing the Pakistani prime Minister Nawaz Shari’s off-the-record comment last September about the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh behaving like a "dehati aurat" (village woman). That embarassed both Sharif and Singh as they met in New York. Considering that Hamid Mir has a long experience as a journalist, many people believe that his remark, calculated to discomfit the politician, was proof of his friendly ties with the military. However, there is no reason to believe that he's lying about this suggestion that that it was the ISI that tried to bump him off. In one of his television programs before the attack, he even displayed the mobile number of one Captain Wajahat from the ISI who was threatening him. Thus far, there are two explanations for the incident. First, some believe that the attack could have been carried out by a faction within the ISI that was unhappy with the journalist's decision to highlight critical issues like the secessionist movement in Baluchistan. Others feel that the attack reflects the tension between the ISI and the army. In an interview to the BBC, Mir had talked about ISI within the ISI. Some sceptics argue that the Director General of the ISI, Zaheer-ul-Islam, is seeking an extension in service as he is due to retire soon, but some want to create conditions that present him as an incompetent chief. Most of all, this is a moment of crisis in a longstanding relationship between the military and the media. It is clear that the Jang group is taking on the military to re-negotiate this relationship. The media knows the military would be in a tight spot if the case goes to court. It may not be able to prove the ISI guilty, as had happened in the Saleem Shahzad murder case of 2011, but it would still be a matter of great embarrassment. It is possible that the Geo group has drawn its power and confidence from the incumbent Nawaz Sharif government, which is eager to cut the military down to its size.

Media Circus by Dr Ayesha Siddiqa Daily Dunya 24-4-2014

Ayesha Siddiqa, Ejaz Haider on Civil Military Relations in Pakistan with Nasim Zehra



Ayesha Siddiqa, Ejaz Haider on Civil Military... by SalimJanMazari


 Re-imaging the media-military relationship

 The media finds itself in the middle of Pakistan's two stakeholders – the army headquarters and the prime minister’s office. Using the media also gives both sides plausible deniability. The government is presently sitting quite relaxed watching the battle between Geo and the army. It understands that every embarrassing moment for the army contributes to its own long-term political mileage. The attacks on journalists are a moment for many in the media to rethink their relationship with the agencies. The intelligence has had a long-term relationship with the media which has even been used to negotiate amongst the three services of the armed forces. Given that Pakistan does not have freedom of information, journalists end up establishing links with intelligence. In the past decade of the war on terror, the military has been a critical supplier of information. There is a long queue of journalists who owe their existence to assistance from the ISI – travelling on military helicopters, landing in exotic areas of conflict and getting stories from inside jail cells. This is not about cultivating sources in the military but ultimately getting cultivated yourself. Intelligence agencies, especially the military ones, are deeply in the business of image management. They have not only managed to penetrate newsrooms but also think-tanks and NGOs. Even foreign academics are financed to write books that present a pro-military version. Most likely, the moment will pass. Most journalsits will continue to maintain their ties with the ISI and other agencies. But this may offer a tiny opportunity for one media group to show that it can take on the military and survive. The Geo group's owner, Mir Shakeel-ur-Rehman, is trying to build bridges. He is a businessman and no ideologue. The military will try to teach the group some lesson. It has already secretly restricted Geo broadcasts in major cities and cantonments. However, there will be resistance to any move to gag the media. The battle for Pakistan’s future is underway, and you can watch it on TV. REFERENCE: The battle for Pakistan's future is playing out on TV The attack on journalist Hamid Mir presents a crucial opportunity for Pakistan's media to renegotiate its relationship with the military and intelligence agencies. Ayesha Siddiqua Saturday, May 3rd 2014 http://scroll.in/article/663426/The-battle-for-Pakistan's-future-is-playing-out-on-TV

Swinging Pendulum of Jang Group on Civilian Control & Patriotism In Pakistan.

Monday, July 28, 2008 EDITORIAL : As the key decision-makers jetted their way towards the US, they left the country in a state of confusion by first issuing an ill planned, sort of arbitrary, notification to place the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) under the interior ministry and then hastily clarifying its intent in a press release issued very late in the night. The confusion did not end just there, and now it appears that the initial decision to place the intelligence agency under the control of the interior ministry has been reversed. The fact that a second press release had to be issued a few hours after the initial story that the ISI had been placed under the interior ministry, (the second one) saying that the intelligence agency was already under civilian control because its chief reported to the prime minister may have to do with negative feedback but also suggests some level of confusion and an apparently ham-handed attempt to resort to some type of damage control. As for the government’s clarification and eventual reversal, it needs to be pointed out that under the old arrangement, where the agency would report to the prime minister through the defence or cabinet division, the wide perception among most people was that it tended to be an institution unto itself and very much under the control of the army chief, who may or may not have had a good working relationship with the executive. To that extent, the transfer to the interior division would have been beneficial simply because the person who heads this ministry is supposed to be any government’s point-man, so to speak, as far as law and order is concerned. The sudden, literally overnight, reversal of the decision also highlights the fact that certain institutions in the country seem to most jealously guard their control over the state’s intelligence apparatus. PPP chief Asif Ali Zardari said after the decision was made public that the move will improve the image of the military, since in the past it had received much flak for being the sponsor of devious doings and of pursuing a foreign policy independent of the elected government. However, there is one valid criticism of the decision and this is that placing the agency under the control of the interior ministry may make it even more vulnerable to being misused to suit a government’s political and ulterior ends. Having said that, as pointed out already it is imperative that all the state’s intelligence-gathering institutions be controlled by civilians eventually and be answerable to parliament. This is because the ISI and the IB have often been accused of in fact working to undermine elected governments. To this effect, the remarks of both the interior and defence ministries made to the Supreme Court in 2006 (while a habeas corpus hearing into some citizens who had disappeared was being conducted) that neither exerted any command over the ISI are instructive. The key is for the ISI and also the IB to be made answerable to parliament, and that their roles be restricted to within the ambit of the Constitution and focused on gathering information and intelligence on those involved in terrorism — and not to harass on innocent citizens or a government’s political opponents. The misuse of agencies to spy on politicians must end but it should also not be handed over to unelected politicians to use it for their own political ends. The ISI in particular is seen by many as a state within the state, pursuing its own agenda. This perception needs to be corrected. While there are questions over whether the Interior Ministry control can cut it down to size, the effort should be to keep the country’s most notorious agency on a tight leash, under existing civilian control. How it works out in practice will depend on the competence and collective wisdom of our ruling political class. REFERENCE: ISI fiasco Monday, July 28, 2008 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=126617&Cat=8&dt=7%2F28%2F2008

The dark cloud of despair rising again BY Ansar Abbasi Wednesday, July 30, 2008 ISLAMABAD: The country's security establishment, often working quietly behind the scene and more often working at odds with elected political power players, has started raising serious doubts about the competence and even credentials of the present ruling set-up, implicitly warning that things may not go on for long if they do not improve. Signs of disapproval of many things that the present regime has done or is doing are thus adding to the fears that the system may be under threat again, hardly weeks after it was born and is still trying to find its feet. Circles close to the establishment say President Musharraf is no more relevant. Neither are his conspiracies. Now the establishment is worried for what the country has seen during the last few months of the civilian rule. In his background interaction, a trusted source and a politician from the ruling coalition shared with this correspondent discussion of a senior Member of Parliament (MP) with some key players of the establishment. Without identifying these key players, the source said that the MP was asked to advise his influential top political leadership that the things as they are today could not prolong if not corrected. The MP's encounter with the establishment's players had occurred before the recent ISI fiasco, which has further eroded the credibility of the present regime. Bad-governance, highly objectionable appointments made during the recent months, growing corruption etc are causes of concern for the establishment but more worrying is the loss of trust between the ruling leadership and some important players of the establishment. REFERENCE: The dark cloud of despair rising again BY Ansar Abbasi Wednesday, July 30, 2008 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=127114&Cat=2&dt=7%2F30%2F2008

 Ansar Abbasi Attacks Nawaz Sharif and ISI.

 
Ansar Abbasi Attacks Nawaz Sharif & ISI. by SalimJanMazari


Has PPP any faith in institutionalised decisions? Comment BY Ansar Abbasi Tuesday, July 29, 2008 ISLAMABAD: The ‘ISI fiasco’ has proved yet again that the present regime has very little faith in institutionalised decisions. Last week’s official order issued to shift the ISI and the IB to the Interior Ministry without consulting the federal cabinet, any parliamentary body or the stakeholders is one such example. It was all done in indecent haste and without even going through any detailed inter-ministerial consultation between the ministries of defence, interior, cabinet, etc. Adviser to the Prime Minister on Interior, Rehman Malik, and his secretary Syed Kamal Shah had reportedly persuaded Asif Ali Zardari to get the Rules of Business amended to bring the ISI under the Interior Ministry apparently for better coordination between the intelligence agencies. While Rehman Malik was initially reported to have claimed that the decision to shift the ISI and the IB was taken with the consent of the president and the Army chief, but later he told a private television channel in London, on his way to Washington, that he was not aware of any notification about putting the chief spying agency under the ministry’s control. Hamid Mir of Geo’s ‘Capital Talk’ told The News that he spoke to Rehman Malik on July 26, the day the contentious notification was issued, for almost 20 minutes and the adviser had assured him that the decision was taken in consultation with President Musharraf, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, Army chief General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani and Asif Ali Zardari. But on July 27, the private TV channel quoted Malik as saying he was not aware of any notification. REFERENCE: Has PPP any faith in institutionalised decisions? Comment BY Ansar Abbasi Tuesday, July 29, 2008 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=16284&Cat=13&dt=7%2F29%2F2008

ISI chief should step down by Ansar Abbasi Sunday, April 20, 2014 ISLAMABAD: Director General ISI Lt. Gen. Zaheer-ul-Islam should step down to protect the respect and sanctity of his institution, which is now burdened with the challenge of catching the real culprits. Whether or not Gen Zaheer or any member of the ISI is involved in this cowardly attack, Hamid Mir’s earlier warning that if an attempt was made on his life the DG ISI and a few others would be responsible has made the institution of the ISI the focus of criticism. This is too serious an allegation against the top spymaster of the country to be ignored. Since Hamid Mir had pointed his finger directly at Gen Zaheer, his name would continue to be taken as a ‘suspect’ by the national and international media till such time as the real culprits are caught. Sometime back during his routine visit to the office of The News Investigations Cell, Mir had told all those present there, including this correspondent, that his life was under threat from the ISI chief Gen Zaheer-ul-Islam and a few of his subordinate officials. He informed us that besides the management of Geo, he had shared his statement about his possible attackers with a few others including an international journalists’ organisation. Keeping in view the profile of Hamid Mir, his warning could not be set aside or pushed under the rug. Mir though did not share the precise reasons as to why he suspected the DG ISI, for any reason Zaheer-ul-Islam is now facing the serious blame of attacking Mir. Because of Zaheer-ul-Islam, the institution of the ISI is also being dragged into the controversy. Even otherwise, there have been complaints about the presence of some “disgruntled elements” in the prime intelligence agency of the country that are said to be serving the vested interest of individuals. They could be dubbed as an “ISI within the ISI”, and there is a need to identify and isolate such elements. The institutions of the Pakistan Army and the ISI are critical for the defence and security of Pakistan but certain individuals, including dictators, have seriously dented the repute and working of these institutions by using them for their vested interests. These institutions badly require reform to get them focused for the prime job they are assigned and this could only be possible by cleansing these institutions of those who are in the habit of using the muscles of these institutions for vested interests. No less a person than Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Army Chief General Raheel Sharif have been informed a few months back of the serious threats to some top members of the Jang Group management. Here too some elements within the ISI were named but neither any inquiry has been ordered nor any security has been provided to those facing threats. Instead, a complete aloofness is shown by those who are required to take action in such matters. Consequently, those threatened have been compelled to live abroad. So many journalists have been killed in the past but hardly in any case have the murderers been caught. A few years back when our colleague Umar Cheema was kidnapped, thrashed and thrown in a deserted area, I had demanded the then DG ISI Lt Gen (retd) Shuja Pasha that if someone in the ISI was not involved in the attack than it was capable enough to get to the culprits. But till this day no one knows who had attacked Cheema. In Hamid Mir’s case, despite his earlier notice and naming of the few, it is premature to finally conclude who did it. But Mir’s complaint has put the institution of the ISI under a shadow. One is sure if the ISI uses its resources and skills, it could get hold of the culprits. Will it do it? REFERENCE: ISI chief should step down by Ansar Abbasi Sunday, April 20, 2014 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-29830-ISI-chief-should-step-down

 And the same Ansar Abbasi in 2009

Establishment — the main target in current fiasco - Politicians point finger at Army, ISI for debacles; all except the president are losers ISLAMABAD: No matter who has authored the script of the ongoing Brig Imtiaz tamasha, engulfing the political arena, the establishment that includes the military-led intelligence agencies and the Pakistan Army have emerged as the main villains, presumably as the authors of the fiasco wanted. Nawaz Sharif and his party are uncomfortable; demand for Musharraf’s trial has been sidetracked at least for the time being; the MQM gets into a position where it believes that its stand is vindicated but the Jinnahpur controversy also created an opportunity for its opponents for a much open criticism of the party and its policies; the issues like the scrapping of 17th Amendment have now become more complex with the two leading parties setting up for a political confrontation after the PML-N finds the Presidency behind the current smear campaign against its top leadership; however, President Asif Zardari is least affected by this recently started political wrangling. It rather has favoured him by temporarily silencing the guns that were targeting him and the government from all around for their alleged misrule, on charges of corruption, the sugar scandal and the reported ruining of the state institutions. REFERENCE: Establishment — the main target in current fiasco - Politicians point finger at Army, ISI for debacles; all except the president are losers BY Ansar Abbasi Wednesday, September 02, 2009 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=24254&Cat=13&dt=9%2F2%2F2009

Guess what it was the same Jang Group of Newspapers which should be blamed for the above

That is not the end because it was the Jang Group of Newspapers, GEO TV, Salim Safi, Shaheen Sehbai, Rauf Klasra and Ansar Abbasi who started giving undue attention to Brigadier (R) Imtiaz much earlier. “How a jilted Karachi woman saved Pak N-programme” that appeared in the daily The News on May 28, 2009 How a jilted Karachi woman saved Pak N-programme Thursday, May 28, 2009 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=22396&Cat=13&dt=5/28/2009Brig Imtiaz reveals 30-year-old secret By Rauf Klasra Watch Imtiaz's Interview Jirga 23rd July 2009 Jirga - with Saleem Saafi, read Brig Imtiaz reveals CIA plots Tuesday, September 01, 2009 By Ansar Abbasi. http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=24241&Cat=13&dt=9/1/2009

Then comes Ansar Abbasi's wild accusations and sweeping statements against the Parliamentarians based on Paranoia that Parliamentarians could be be Foreign agents, hence Traitors, "The most dangerous aspect of the 18th Amendment is to open the doors of parliament to any convict, who may have been sentenced for propagating or acting in any manner prejudicial to the ideology, sovereignty, integrity and security of Pakistan. This provision of the 18th Amendment might even allow convicted local spies of the RAW, the CIA, the FBI and even Mossad to become members of parliament and even aspire to become the prime minister of the country" Convicts can grab top political posts by Ansar Abbasi Saturday, April 24, 2010 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=28471&Cat=13&dt=4/24/2010 Please note that the Brigadier Imtiaz which was targeted by Ansar Abbasi above for blaming the civilians that they are hatching conspiracy against Establishment by using Imtiaz. Whereas the same Imtiaz is being praised by no one else but some Editor in the same newspaper -- Brig Imtiaz defends agencies’ non-cooperation with UN mission Editor Reporting Sunday, April 25, 2010 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=28488&Cat=13&dt=4/25/2010

PAKISTAN Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Credible reports indicated that the authorities routinely use wiretaps and intercepted and opened mail. The Supreme Court directed the Government to seek its permission before carrying out wiretapping or eavesdropping operations; however, the judiciary's directive has been ignored widely. No action was taken during the year in the 1996 case of 12 government agencies accused of tapping and monitoring citizens' phone calls and no additional action was expected. REFERENCE: PAKISTAN Country Reports on Human Rights Practices Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor 2002 http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2002/18314.htm

In 1997 the Supreme Court directed the federal Government to seek the Court's permission before carrying out any future wiretapping or eavesdropping operations. Nonetheless, that same year, a lawyer for a former director of the Intelligence Bureau, charged with illegal wiretapping during Benazir Bhutto's second term in office, presented the Supreme Court with a list of 12 government agencies that still tapped and monitored telephone calls of citizens. The case is pending in the Supreme Court. A press story in October 1998 quoted anonymous cabinet ministers who complained of wiretapping of their telephones by the Intelligence Bureau. EFERENCE: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor 1999 http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/1999/441.htm

Pakistan's Constitution of 1973 says (Jang Group/GEO TV/The News International flagrantly violate the following article) 

 "QUOTE" 

 14. Inviolability of dignity of man, etc.

(1) The dignity of man and, subject to law, the privacy of home, shall be inviolable. REFERENCE: PART II Fundamental Rights and Principles of Policy http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/part2.ch1.html The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/

 "UNQUOTE"

Now note the conduct of these Journalists in Jang Group of Newspapers

Kamran Khan on Ansar Abbasi & Illegal Telephone Tapping - 1

 

Kamran Khan on Ansar Abbasi & Illegal Telephone... by SalimJanMazari

Failed coup against ISI was to appease US BY Shaheen Sehbai Monday, July 28, 2008 WASHINGTON: The politically ill-advised developments in Islamabad to take over control of the otherwise notorious ISI are deeply linked to Prime Minister Gilani’s US visit, as the most painful and probably the only sticking point in his talks with the Bush administration would be the role of Pakistani agencies inside Afghanistan, Fata and against the US interests. Informed members of the PM’s entourage, who have arrived in advance, privately say Gilani will be put on the spot in some of his top-level meetings, confronted with evidence that some out-of-control parts of the Pakistani agencies, either with or without Islamabad’s nod, were working at odds with the US goals and this has to be curbed by the political government if it wants generous economic and political support from Washington and even its allies and friends, including Saudi Arabia. Pakistani diplomats are confident that while the visit will sail through without hitch, the issue of controlling the undesirable role of the agencies will be too hot to handle for an inexperienced prime minister. Thus, he was more than eager to take some decision on who would control the ISI before landing at the Andrews Air Force Base on the outskirts of Washington at 12:30 am Monday morning (Pakistan Standard Time). The US side is prepared with all kinds of evidence, videos, audios plus transcripts to show Gilani that his agencies were playing double games in seriously stopping the terrorists inside Pakistan from operating freely. One such example to quote is the press conference addressed by Baitullah Mehsud with dozens of journalists travelling inside Fata to secret locations which, the US side claims, could never have remained secret from the vigilant Pakistani agencies. But if a terrorist can call and address a news conference with all TV and media presence in full force, there is no excuse for the agencies not to know where he was located. The Pakistani side is also preparing its own counter arguments claiming that if the US can immediately track down the voice of Baitullah Mehsud, within hours after Benazir Bhutto’s murder claiming responsibility for the heinous act, why could they not track down and share the information with Pakistan on the whereabouts of the militant leader so that Pakistan could act in real time. But all these arguments bring into sharp focus the role of the agencies and by ordering that, henceforth, the ISI would be controlled by the interior ministry, Gilani was trying to arm himself with talking points to assure the Americans that he was serious in dealing with the situation and should be given time and support to handle what has been a long and ongoing notorious operation without any civilian political oversight. Yet the manner in which Gilani and even Asif Ali Zardari handled the matter so casually and without deep thought has now caused not only a public embarrassment for the prime minister, even before he landed on the US soil, but he will be hard pressed to avoid the gazing looks of uniformed US generals when they seek answers to their pointed questions. Both Pakistani and US sides preparing for these serious discussions are deeply skeptical of the role of some of the Pakistani leaders, specially the over-zealous interior ministry bosses, in misleading and misguiding their own leadership as well as the people and the media on how and why the sensitive ISI affair was handled. Rehman Malik has repeatedly said on Pakistani TV channels that the president, the Army chief, the prime minister and Asif Ali Zardari were not only consulted but had agreed to the change of command of the ISI but each of these players, importantly the presidency and the GHQ, have said categorically that they were not on board. So, Malik has to do a lot of explaining on what was going on and why he was making misleading claims. It is not the first time that Malik has been acting in such an arbitrary manner and his action of postponing the by-elections without consulting anyone, a decision which had to be reversed, was a similar attempt at exercising power that did not exist in the manner he wanted to use it. The cryptic remarks of some of the military people made to important journalists about imagining a situation in which the ISI would be run by Malik indicate the level of mistrust and contempt about some of the unelected leaders in the PPP government. But they are thriving and it is a deepening mystery why. So when Prime Minister Gilani lands in Washington, he will not only have to worry about what he will face in meetings with the US leaders but will also have to prepare some convincing explanations for his own party leader, who is believed to have already reprimanded the PM for not being able to comprehend the seriousness and sensitivity of the decision that he took and caused a huge backfire. REFERENCE: Failed coup against ISI was to appease US BY Shaheen Sehbai Monday, July 28, 2008 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=16258&Cat=13&dt=7%2F28%2F2008

Kamran Khan on Ansar Abbasi & Illegal Telephone Tapping - 2



Kamran Khan on Ansar Abbasi & Illegal Telephone... by SalimJanMazari

Is Rehman Malik himself on the chopping block? The question being asked is whether the adviser acted on his own or on party recommendation BY Ansar Abbasi Thursday, July 31, 2008 ISLAMABAD: Rehman Malik has hinted from Washington of the possible rolling of some heads in the bureaucracy for causing the recent ISI fiasco but the reports making rounds in Islamabad suggest that the prime minister's adviser on interior might find his own head on the chopping block. While a renowned defence analyst and writer privately told this correspondent on Wednesday that Asif Ali Zardari would possibly be required to fire Rehman Malik sooner than later, the PPP spokesman Farhatullah Babar said that he was not aware of any such move. A PPP leader though confided to this correspondent that the controversies generated by Rehman Malik might force the party leaders to review his role, admitting at the same time that it would be a "tall order". Farhatullah Babar, however, said that the PPP coalition government believes in accountability even if it involves its own people. For this purpose, he explained that the party's co-chairperson has set-up an ethics committee also. Malik told journalists in Washington on Tuesday that he had absolutely nothing to do with the controversial notification to take over the ISI and the IB and said that when he would return to Pakistan he would see that some heads rolled immediately for this blunder. Malik explained that the notification was issued by some bureaucrats who, according to him, included the name of the ISI without getting proper approval from the competent authority and he would see that those responsible were taken to task. Before his latest statement, the security czar had told a private television channel that he was not aware of any notification about putting the ISI under the control of the Interior Ministry. And before that, on July 26, when the controversial notification was issued, he was quoted to have said that placing the ISI and the IB under the interior ministry was the consequence of consultation between the president, the prime minister, the Army chief and Asif Ali Zardari. Zardari House knows that the latest ISI fiasco is too serious a thing to be ignored or pushed under the rug. Though Malik now claims he was not part of this controversy, sources even in the PPP admit that it was the adviser on interior who had sold the controversial idea to Asif Ali Zardari. Previously, at least on two occasions, Malik became the centre of controversies. In May he surprised everyone by his role in the postponement of the by-polls. Although, he denied his role in that case too, it was the Frontier Chief Minister Amir Haider Hoti, who told the media that he was approached by Malik to write to the federal government seeking postponement of the by-polls, which interestingly the young chief minister did. The CM said that he was told by Malik that all the other provinces were also conveying similar requests to the federal authorities. Later, Secretary Election Commission Kanwar Dilshad also said that he too was contacted by Malik, who sought the postponement of the by-elections and informed the secretary that the NWFP government was writing for the postponement of the by-polls whereas the other three provinces also had security concerns. On another occasion, Malik hit the headline by announcing that Swat peace deal had been scrapped. The statement shocked both the Army and the Frontier government. However, a day after in his televised press conference, Malik said that he never talked of scrapping of the deal. Malik had been quoted by different news agencies as telling a group of reporters, "The Swat agreement is scrapped as the militants have continued their attack on the security forces." The Frontier government had reacted sharply to Malik's statement while the military spokesman too said that the Army was not aware of any such development. Because the party has not taken any action against Malik earlier, the question is being asked whether he took those decisions on his own or on the recommendations of the party. REFERENCE: Is Rehman Malik himself on the chopping block? The question being asked is whether the adviser acted on his own or on party recommendation BY Ansar Abbasi Thursday, July 31, 2008 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=127298&Cat=2&dt=7%2F31%2F2008

‘Angels’ blocking Geo, The News, Jang : Channel shut down, papers blocked in cantonments, defence organisations; Geo pushed to last numbers on TVs in civilian areas - ISLAMABAD: Who says the chief of the ‘angels’ is ordering and monitoring the closure of all channels of the Geo Group through cable operators and stopping the distribution of daily Jang, which existed even at the time of the creation of Pakistan, and The News in cantonment areas? This is indeed happening in all cities across the country. Geo has been blocked, and the circulation of Jang and The News stopped in all cantonments and companies and corporations under military officials’ control. Besides, in civil areas, attempts are under way to block Geo, and it has been pushed to the last numbers on TV in some areas. Following the life attempt on Hamid Mir, the well-known anchor of Geo News, the transmission of Geo group channels was initially being stopped in the cantonment areas but now the ISI has started contacting the cable operators in civilian areas and operators are being “asked” to block all Geo channels even in non-cantonment areas. The Geo/Jang Group, which according to its spokesman, was already facing the worst financial crisis in recent months has been badly damaged financially by the most recent blackout of its channels in many areas of different cities across the country. REFERENCE: ‘Angels’ blocking Geo, The News, Jang Channel shut down, papers blocked in cantonments, defence organisations; Geo pushed to last numbers on TVs in civilian areas by Ahmad Noorani Friday, April 25, 2014 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-29919-Angels-blocking-Geo-The-News-Jang

 Ahmed Noorani Tapped Nazir Naji Telephone Calls

 

Ahmed Noorani Tapped Nazir Naji Telephone Calls by SalimJanMazari

Jang Group star reporters often attack International Human Rights Organizations in a worse possible way and not only that they also threaten Human Rights Activists in Pakistan  , here are few examples

Let’s see what HRW could not see in Pakistan News Analysis by Ahmad Noorani ISLAMABAD: In yet another display of politically motivated opinions, the Human Rights Watch (HRW) has ignored the PPP government’s failure to check massive human rights violations in Pakistan in its latest global report for the year 2012 but has once again come up with a charge-sheet against the country’s independent judiciary. Implicitly favouring the present regime, the HRW has based its opinion on half-truths, complete lies, distorted facts and subjective views. The US-based HRW report seems to be a clear attempt to further fuel already intense sectarian violence and to create chaos and disorder in Pakistan. Once again the organisation has repeated its allegation in an indirect way that Shia Muslims in Pakistan are being killed at the behest of the Pakistan Army. HRW has again alleged that media independence is being hurt in Pakistan because of the judiciary despite the fact that HRW failed to carry out an independent inquiry into the November 2012 press release on the same subject which was rejected by the whole Pakistani media and HRW’s credibility was badly hurt. REFERENCE: Let’s see what HRW could not see in Pakistan News Analysis by Ahmad Noorani Saturday, February 02, 2013 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-2-157664-Lets-see-what-HRW-could-not-see-in-Pakistan

HRW again interferes blatantly in Pak judicial matters By Ahmad Noorani US-funded body ignores personal attacks on judges, due criticism on media; analysts say HRW Pakistan chapter highly politicised; serving interests of a particular class of rulers; rights body fails to mention reasons behind court’s action; restraining orders were issued after some highly abusive and derogatory programmes; Brad Adams either ignorant or misled about facts in Pakistan; Justice Wajih says HR bodies should focus on executive, not judiciary - The Human Rights Watch (HRW), an American-funded international NGO, has blatantly interfered in the Pakistan’s judicial system and has acted in a highly politicised manner to serve the interests of a particular class of the rulers, directly attacking Pakistan’s independent judiciary, analysts say. No doubt, HRW is considered as one of the leading human rights organisations in the world but unfortunately its Pakistan’s chapter is highly politicised and has close links and affiliations in Islamabad with the ruling PPP. Justice Wajihuddin Ahmad, former chief justice of Sindh High Court and judge of the Supreme Court who refused to take oath under Musharraf’s first martial law, said any order categorically ordering media not to criticise the judiciary will not only be a violation of human rights but will also be against the constitution. REFERENCE: HRW again interferes blatantly in Pak judicial matters By Ahmad Noorani Wednesday, November 28, 2012 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-19130-HRW-again-interferes-blatantly-in-Pak-judicial-matters

HRW presented one-sided view on Balochistan to US panel by Ahmad Noorani ISLAMABAD: Ali Dayan Hasan, Pakistan director of a US NGO, Human Rights Watch (HRW), was the only Pakistani who appeared as a witness on Balochistan issue during the illegal hearing of US House of Representatives’ Committee on Foreign Affairs and gave testimony against Pakistan by presenting wrong facts and figures. Leading politicians from government and opposition parties have condemned in the strongest words the conspiracy of some Pakistanis to take the indigenous issue of Balochistan to the American government and US Congress Committee and have demanded strict legal actions against such elements. While the US is all out to balkanise Pakistan initially by supporting independence of Balochistan and by siding with the angry Baloch separatist elements, American planted NGOs and some so-called liberal elements are also all out to implement US agenda to destabilise Pakistan by disintegrating and isolating its social ranks. Reference: HRW presented one-sided view on Balochistan to US panel by Ahmad Noorani Tuesday, February 21, 2012 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-12612-HRW-presented-one-sided-view-on-Balochistan-to-US-panel

HRW launches campaign against media - HRW Pak director’s sayings and deeds do not match; Ali Dayan sent questions and his response will be used as it is BY Ahmad Noorani ISLAMABAD: Human Rights Watch (HRW), the leading human rights organisation of the world, has launched an offensive against the media instead of responding to journalistic criticism by ‘The News’ on its World Report-2013. HRW director in Pakistan Ali Dayan Hasan, in different media interactions, instead of elaborating the points of HRW World Report-2013 regarding Pakistan or discussing the points of criticism in ‘The News’ story, has started attacking the newspaper and leveling different baseless allegations. The News has discussed with the leaders of the religious and political organisations about the findings of the HRW World Report-2013 regarding Pakistan and journalistic objections raised by the newspaper. HRW, in its present report and the earlier testimony before US House committee working on Balkanisation of Pakistan, has held that there is Shia-Sunni infighting in Pakistan and Sunni militant groups are killing Shia Muslims. HRW has also held that it is believed that Shia Muslims, especially Hazara community in Balochistan, are being killed at the behest of Pakistan Army. After The News article, Dayan is now holding the government responsible for such killings in his recent media interviews but, in his report, he never held the PPP government responsible and never discussed the government’s failure to control these terrorists. REFERENCE: HRW launches campaign against media - HRW Pak director’s sayings and deeds do not match; Ali Dayan sent questions and his response will be used as it is BY Ahmad Noorani Saturday, February 09, 2013 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-2-159017-HRW-launches-campaign-against-media

HRW jumps into memogate in controversial move - Accuses SC of subverting the civilian government, cutting president’s term ISLAMABAD: The otherwise neutral and objective organisation Human Rights Watch on Friday took a highly objectionable and partisan position against the superior judiciary of Pakistan accusing the Supreme Court of indirectly “truncating parliamentary and presidential terms” and “subverting the civilian rule.” A statement of HRW said that it had noticed a tendency for the courts to find themselves embroiled in matters that they would not otherwise be an appropriate forum to consider. Ali Dayan Hasan, the Pakistan Director of Human Rights Watch (HRW), in a statement issued after the SC verdict to set up a judicial commission in the memogate case said: “All parties to the memogate affair must understand that a legal dispute cannot be made the vehicle for truncating parliamentary or presidential terms through the backdoor or as a mechanism for subverting civilian rule.” The highly controversial HRW statement said: “As the ‘memogate’ case proceeds, all arms of the state must act within their constitutionally determined ambit and in aid of legitimate civilian rule. In this context, justice must both be done and be seen to be done. Pakistan desperately needs a full democratic cycle and a peaceful transfer of power from one civilian administration to another. Should this process be derailed, the constitutional safeguards and legal rights protections created since 2008 may suffer irreparable damage. Reference: HRW jumps into memogate in controversial move - Accuses SC of subverting the civilian government, cutting president’s term News Desk Saturday, December 31, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-11389-HRW-jumps-into-memogate-in-controversial-move

Ex-chief justice raps HRW for interfering with SC - HRW rep Dayan defends his organisation which fears for democracy  ISLAMABAD: Former Chief Justice of Pakistan Saeed-ul-Zaman Siddiqui has strongly criticised what he called an attack on the integrity of Pakistan’s state institutions like the superior judiciary by a foreign organisation working in Pakistan under the cover of human rights, writes Ahmad Noorani. “No one can be allowed to attack the sanctity and integrity of the state institutions or scandalise them,” he told The News while reacting to the controversial statement issued by the Human Rights Watch (HRW) criticising the SC verdict in the memogate case on Friday. Justice Siddiqui said that the sentences used in the press release are a direct intervention into the internal affairs of Pakistan and no such organisation could be allowed to extend its comments to this level. He said that Supreme Court should take immediate notice of such dirty attacks and that too by a foreign American-funded organisation. The HRW Pakistan Friday issued a highly contemptuous press release minutes after the announcement of judgment in memo case, apparently backed by the PPP government, attacking national institutions, judiciary and army and alleged that there is a perception that judiciary is discriminating against the civilian government. The human rights organisation having its headquarters in New York directly maligned the institution of judiciary over a case which is still under hearing of the Supreme Court. Referring to memo case, the press release of HRW “instructed” the Supreme Court that “justice must both be done and be seen to be done.” REFERENCE: Ex-chief justice raps HRW for interfering with SC - HRW rep Dayan defends his organisation which fears for democracy Saturday, December 31, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-11390-Ex-chief-justice-raps-HRW-for-interfering-with-SC

Now note how Mr. Hamid Mir and Jang Group of Newspapers justify the Brutal Murder of Former Governor Punjab, Pakistan, Salmaan Taseer

Liberal fascism? by Hamid Mir Tuesday, November 03, 2009 Jonah Goldberg is a columnist for The Los Angeles Times. He recently wrote a book on liberal fascism. He started his book with Mussolini who was the father of fascism in Italy. Jonah also discussed American liberalism as a new totalitarian political religion very close to fascism. Finally Jonah Goldberg declared Hillary Clinton as "The First Lady of Liberal Fascism." Jonah avoided using the term of liberal fascist for President Barack Obama but he feared that America was slowly becoming a fascist country. It was difficult for me to believe that Hillary could be a fascist because she is a fascinating person. I read the book just a few days ago when I was travelling from the US to Pakistan. Luckily I got a chance to meet Hillary Clinton during her official visit to Pakistan on the evening of Oct 28 at the Islamabad residence of the US ambassador. I was one of the six TV anchors invited for a candid talk with the secretary of state. She was very much concerned about the bad image of her country in Pakistan and she said that "we must listen to each other and we must be honest with each other." I put just three short questions to Hillary Clinton. My first question was about the rule of law. I referred to the Kerry-Lugar bill in which the US expressed desire for the rule of law in Pakistan and humbly asked why US officials were breaking Pakistani laws again and again in Islamabad. I informed her that four US marines were arrested at 3 a.m. on Oct 27 in Islamabad with illegal weapons in their hands. They were released within one hour of their arrest. I asked: "Who ordered them to patrol the roads of Islamabad? Will you allow Pakistani soldiers to patrol the roads of Washington DC with weapons in their hands?" Hillary said that diplomats enjoyed immunity and they carried weapons. I again informed her that diplomats did not come out on the roads at three in the morning. She said: "I will look into this matter." I was not satisfied with her answer. She told us that the US wanted a strong and vibrant democracy in Pakistan. I again asked her that if the US cared too much about democracy, then why it didn't care about the unanimous resolution of our new parliament against US drones attacks. I said, "Instead of listening to the voice of democracy coming through our parliament you have increased drone attacks which means that you have no respect for our democracy." Once again she just said, "We have to win the war against terror and we have to support democracy in Pakistan." My third question was about the American desire for civilian control on the security establishment of Pakistan expressed in the Kerry-Lugar bill many times. I asked, "Do you want a civilian to head the ISI?" She never said no, but explained, "We can have a head of the CIA both from military and civilians and you can also have the head of the ISI from military and civilians." The answer clearly gave a message that the US wants a civilian to head the premier intelligence agency of Pakistan. Hillary Clinton never said anything new to us. When I was coming back after meeting her I was thinking about Liberal Fascism written by Jonah Goldberg. Hillary Clinton must give clear and straight answers to the questions burning in the minds of common Pakistanis. Otherwise, we will be forced to believe that she is taking America into a new era of liberal fascism. Reference: Liberal fascism? by Hamid Mir Tuesday, November 03, 2009 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=206525&Cat=9&dt=11/4/2009

Taliban Journalist of Jang Group Justify Salmaan Taseer Murder (GEOTV 2011)

 

Taliban Journalist of Jang Group Justify... by SalimJanMazari

 Liberal extremism vs religious extremism — both are wrong by Hamid Mir Tuesday, January 11, 2011  ISLAMABAD: It’s very difficult for me to write about Salmaan Taseer, the assassinated Punjab Governor. Once he was a good friend and later he became a ferocious enemy. He spoke against me and against Geo TV on many television shows as the governor and I wrote against him many times in the last couple of years because he had joined hands with dictator Pervez Musharraf after the imposition of emergency on November 3, 2007. I was standing with the deposed chief justice of Pakistan and Taseer tried to stop the restoration of deposed judges, first by helping Musharraf and then by helping President Asif Ali Zardari. Musharraf appointed him the governor of Punjab in May 2008 with the hope that Taseer will convince Zardari to accept the former dictator as the president for five years. Musharraf was wrong. Zardari ultimately forced him to resign and occupied the Presidency with the help of Taseer. Within a few days of becoming the President, Zardari arranged my meeting with Taseer and forced us to forget our past differences because Zardari was aware that we enjoyed a friendship of 20 years (from 1987 to 2007). Unfortunately, President Zardari failed to remove the mistrust between his governor and a journalist. We embarrassed the President of Pakistan. In the next two years, we spoke against each other many times, especially when Zardari imposed the Governor’s Rule in the Punjab to suppress the movement for the restoration of deposed judges. Zardari and Taseer failed to stop that movement and finally they were forced to restore the judges. My differences with President Zardari and Taseer were over after that. Thanks to the floods last year, Taseer showed a big heart and made truce with me. It was August 2010 when Taseer surprised me. He saw me in the flood affected area of Multan and sent a message of reconciliation through his media adviser Farrukh Shah. I accepted because I was impressed that the governor was trying his best to help the flood victims. We had tea together after many years. He praised my visits to the flooded areas in boats and I praised his commitment to the flood victims. Taseer wanted to discuss many things but I was going to Muzaffargarh with Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani. We talked and laughed and then I said goodbye to him with a promise to meet him again in Lahore. I saw him again in the reception for the Chinese premier in Islamabad. Just one day before his assassination, I was in Lahore and tried to contact him. I wanted his views on the gas loadshedding in the Punjab. I was informed that he was in Islamabad. The next day, I arrived back in Islamabad and in late afternoon my colleague Rana Jawad told me that Taseer was shot in front of my favorite restaurant in the capital. I was stunned but then I smiled. I told my colleague “Taseer is a hard nut to crack, he will survive.” My colleague said that only a miracle could save him because Taseer got more than one bullet in his neck. Now I was nervous. After a few minutes, I came to know that a police guard had fired more than 27 bullets on Taseer. He was angry with Taseer because he took a position against the country’s blasphemy laws. There was no justification for any individual to kill someone just for criticising a law. I was more disturbed when I started receiving SMS in support of his killer the same evening. Many religious leaders refused to condemn the assassination of Taseer. I took it as a challenge and decided to get condemnation from the head of the biggest religious party of the country — Jamiat Ulema Islam chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman. I contacted him on phone on my television show and just asked, “Will you condemn the murder of Salmaan Taseer?” I was surprised when Maulana Sahib tried to avoid my question. He was not in a mood to condemn the murder but I was repeating my question again and again. Finally, the Maulana Sahib condemned the murder of Taseer. It was not my victory. It was the victory of all those who believed in the teachings of founder of Pakistan Muhammad Ali Jinnah. He believed in the rule of law. No individual has the right to become a judge and punish someone without hearing his point of view. When I finished my show, many extremists started threatening me. But I was not alone. A big majority of my colleagues encouraged me, including the critics of Taseer. More than 500 religious clerics issued a statement in support of the assassin and declared that no Muslim should participate in his funeral prayers because the late governor was trying to release a Christian woman convicted under the blasphemy case. This statement came from the anti-Taliban Barelvi scholars, who lost their leaders like Mufti Safaraz Naeemi at the hands of the Taliban in 2009. All the top religious scholars of the Lahore city refused to lead the funeral prayers of Taseer, including the prayer leader of the mosque in the Governor House of Lahore. The Barelvi Ulema took a very extreme position. On the other side, some English newspapers declared that blasphemy law was the main cause for the killing of Taseer. It was also an extreme position. It is a very difficult situation for the host of a popular TV talk show. I took another risk. On the day of the funeral, I interviewed another important Islamic scholar Mufti Muneebur Rehman, who expressed his condolences with the family of Taseer. Mufti Muneeb belongs to the Barelvi school of thought. He was one of the first Islamic scholars who came out openly against the suicide bombings of Taliban in my TV show five years ago. Mufti Muneeb also opposed Taseer’s views on the blasphemy laws but he never approved the murder of Taseer. I was relieved after the statement of Mufti Muneeb. At least, someone from religious clergy came out openly against the killing. I think Salmaan Taseer was a misunderstood person. His son Aatish Taseer portrayed his father as an enemy of Jews and Hindus in his writings just because Taseer left his Indian Sikh mother Talveen Singh in 1980. In fact, Taseer represented the western way of life in his private life but Aatish wrongly accused his father for having a religious hatred against the Jews and Hindus. The assassin of Taseer also had a wrong impression about Taseer and he killed him as an enemy of Islam. Aatish Taseer and the assassin, Malik Mumtaz Qadri, represent two different extremes. One is a liberal extremist who leveled unfounded charges against his father. The other is a religious extremist. I am sure that both these two extremes are very dangerous for our values. We must fight both, the religious extremists and the liberal extremists. I must say that the ruling Pakistan People’s Party is also responsible for Taseer’s death. When Taseer criticised the blasphemy laws, his own party, including President Zardari, never took a stand for him. Law Minister Babar Awan said that nobody would be allowed to make a change in the blasphemy laws. The views of Taseer were misunderstood because the US is also demanding that Pakistan repeal the blasphemy laws. The common Pakistanis don’t like the US interference and that was why Taseer was declared an American agent by many rightwing parties. We can compare this controversy with the cases of Binayak Sen and Arundhati Roy in India. They are facing sedition charges because they are outspoken like Salmaan Taseer and they are hated by the right wing like Taseer. They are facing death threats and they are supported by the US and unfortunately the support from the US is definitely a disadvantage in South Asia. Personally, I also believe that there is no need to change the blasphemy laws right now because these laws were passed by our parliament in 1992 and we cannot afford new controversies these days. Prime Minister Gilani has written in his autobiography published in 2006 that the late Benazir Bhutto was also an opponent of changing the blasphemy laws. But we must not allow a person to kill another person just for criticising these laws. Freedom of expression is assured in Article 19 of the Constitution of Pakistan. I think that human rights bodies must fight the case of poor Christian woman convicted in blasphemy in the high court and the Supreme Court. They should not force the President of Pakistan to announce a pardon because it will create further divisions in our society. We must resolve our problems through the rule of law. Religious parties once again showed their street power on January 9 in Karachi in support of the blasphemy laws. Interestingly, Sunni and Shia scholars never condoned the murder of Taseer but they were together in defending the blasphemy laws. The Punjab Assembly showed maturity on Monday by condemning the murder of Salmaan Taseer. I think that blasphemy law is a safety valve against violence but I also believe that we must condemn the murder of Salmaan Taseer. Now some PPP leaders are trying to put the blame of his assassination on the PML-N. This is dirty politics. We need unity to fight extremism. I am sure we can defeat extremism not with the help of US but with the help of our own values based on tolerance. We need a made-in-Pakistan solution for fighting terrorism and extremism. A made in US solution will completely destroy us. REFERENCE: We need a ‘made-in-Pakistan’ solution for fighting terrorism - Liberal extremism vs religious extremism — both are wrong by Hamid Mir Tuesday, January 11, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-3234-We-need-a-made-in-Pakistan-solution-for-fighting-terrorism Hamid Mir on Liberal Fascist in Pakistan Thursday January 20 2011 Safar 15 1432 AH http://jang.com.pk/jang/jan2011-daily/20-01-2011/col5.htm