Pakistani Taliban Union of Journalists (PTUJ)

By: Abdul Nishapuri

Association's name: Pakistani Taliban Union of Journalists (PTUJ)

Aliases: Friends of Taliban, Mullah Media Alliance, Dehshat nigar, Col-anchors, 18 crori, Conspiracy theorists

Area of influence: Islamic federation of Pakistan, Afghanistan and India

Sister organizations: Hizb ut-Tahrir, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, Al Qaeda, Sipah-e-Sahaba, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jamaat-e-Islami, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, other jihadi and sectarian sleepers in Pakistan's civil and military establishment

Aims

1. To justify Taliban's acts of terrorism against Pakistan Army, police, parliament, politicians and ordinary citizens of Pakistan on one pretext or the other;

2. To portray Taliban as a true representative of Islam;

3. To exploit the Pakistani nation's emotions by playing the Islam versus USA card;

4. To destabilize the democratic government of Pakistan in order to abolish the successful military operation against the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

Office bearers

Founder: Hamid Mir President: Dr Shahid Masood

Vice President: Ansar Abbasi General Secretary: Dr Shireen Mazari

Story writer: Javed Chaudhry

Board of directors

Irfan Siddiqi Orya Maqbool Jan Mushtaq Minhas

Junior members

Muhammad Saleh Zaafir (The News)

Mohammad Ahmed Noorani (The News)

Technical advisers

The following are not Taliban supporters. They are however known for their sinister contacts with the anti-democracy establishment in Pakistan:

Shaheen Sehbai Haroon-ur-Rasheed Syed Talat Hussain

......

Explanatory note about the PTUJ's video clip on youtube

We have noted with concern that certain cyberspace activists have adapted the above article as a youtube video (rated "R"). We do not endorse the abusive language used against the pro-Taliban journalists, and request the concerned persons to remove the "R" content from their video.

......

Some snippets, some comments

“I, Muhammad Saleh Zaafir, do hereby tender an unconditional apology to the hon’ble court in relation to the contents of the story that appeared in daily The News/daily Jang on June 11, 2007.

“I have been directed by the hon’ble court to submit any proof in relations to the contents of the said items. I would humbly submit that I have no proof whatsoever in relation to the matter discussed in the said story.

“I keep this hon’ble court in the highest esteem and respect. I can never ever think of bringing about a bad name to the hon’ble court or to any learned judge of the hon’able court. I would submit that I can never think of committing contempt of this hon’ble court.

“I undertake to be careful in future and am ashamed for the publication of the story. I would humbly seek pardon in relation to the grievous lapse. “I pray to the hon’ble court that no further action may kindly be proceeded in relation to the matter. I would entreat that my unconditional apology may graciously be accepted.”

http://thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=8458

....

Is talking to militants an option?

Wednesday, November 04, 2009 I write this in reference to "We must go for talks, not war" (Nov 2) by Ansar Abbasi. It is really easy to call for holding talks with militants while sitting in Islamabad. At a time when our brave jawans and officers of the Pakistan army are fighting a full-scale battle in the tribal areas against all odds, we should stand united beside them as a nation. Mr Abbasi should visit Peshawar at least which is apparently under siege for the last one month, especially after the recent bombing in the Meena Bazaar where the majority of the victims were innocent women and children, to know how barbarous these militants are. It is time every Pakistani stood with the army and fought against militancy. I think the suggestion of having talks with people like Hakimullah, Baitullah, Fazlullah or Muslim Khan is a total non-option, for our gallant sons have laid down their lives fighting against the same miscreants. I have no doubt in my mind that war and only war against these beasts is the final option now. Ajab Khan Peshawar ***** This is with reference to the news analysis "We must go for talks, not war" by Ansar Abbasi (Nov 2). I would like to ask the learned writer as to what we can offer these terrorists, whom he is calling Pakistani, and what we can demand in return? Kamran Bangash Dubai, UAE ***** This is in connection with the news analyses by Mohammad Malick and Ansar Abbasi published in your newspaper on Nov 2. I believe that in the ongoing war against terrorism we the people of Pakistan must stand by our army. The rhetoric that this is not our war must be ended. Initially it might not have been our war but now it has become our war. The people of Swat, Mingora, Bajaur, Waziristan and adjacent areas are going through the worst times of their life. Their innocent children and women are dying everyday. If any madressahs have become sanctuaries for terrorists then they must be eliminated. Nabeel Anwar Dhakku Chakwal ***** This is with reference to Ansar Abbasi's news analysis "We must go for talks, not war" (Nov 2). The Pakistan army first had to fight against miscreants in Swat and Malakand and now it is busy fighting foreign Uzbek terrorists and their local aides hiding in South Waziristan. It is crystal-clear that Pakistanis do not have any option other than to fight the terrorists. It means our soldiers have to sacrifice their lives – and we should stand by them. After witnessing numerous suicide attacks and subversive activities, it's amazing that Mr Abbasi still feels that terrorists should be negotiated with. The matter is not that simple as he is portraying. These terrorists are playing in the hands of foreign elements and they consider us Pakistanis and the Pakistan army as their enemy. On the contrary, I found the comments by Muhammad Malik (Nov 2) quite reasonable as he suggested that the only way to curb terrorism is to eliminate the militants from our country. Instead of doubting the will of the army, the political leadership, parliament and the media should come forward and join hands with the armed forces to get the motherland out of this menace. Saima Iqbal Hasan Karachi http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=206675 War or talks? Thursday, November 05, 2009 This refers to the write-ups of Mohammad Malick and Ansaar Abbasi published in your newspaper on Nov 2. The debate initiated by your newspaper is worthwhile, especially from the point of view of the ordinary people. As asserted rightly by Mr Malick, Pakistan is at war, a war of its very survival. Anyone denying this fact is suffering from self-deception and, in my view, is a 'closet Taliban'. Whatever the history, reasons and background of this conflict are, it is now our war against the enemies of the country. The terrorists are not only targeting government offices and armed forces establishments, but also they are murdering innocent civilians. We, as a nation, need to rise up to this challenge and face the terrorists with all our might, resolute determination and resources to save the country from this impending catastrophe. While the write-up by Mr Malick was rational, objective and logical, unfortunately Mr Abbasi's was full of US bashing. For no less than 12 times, Mr Abbasi criticised Washington in his relatively small piece. Mr Abbasi branded Pervez Musharraf as 'Washington's poodle', which he probably was, however, one wonders as to in whose lap Mr Abbasi is being cuddled now? While condemning the US for drone attacks and the killing of citizens of Pakistan, why did Mr Abbasi conveniently ignore the daily murderous attacks, suicide bombings and decapitations of innocent civilians by the insane Taliban terrorists? M S Hasan Karachi In my view, the question posed by Ansar Abbasi (Nov 2) is closed-ended in its nature and therefore may not provide the respondents with a chance to come up with any creative and novel solution to this highly complex problem. A simple yes or no does not seem to be the right answer. We have to be clear about the objectives to be achieved through this war. Obviously the armed forces cannot stay in South Waziristan for an indefinite period. The top most priority should be to ensure that the area is cleansed from the extremists and the writ of the government is established. However, it is a fact that the miscreants and terrorists can never be wiped out once and for all. The history of the area bears testimony to the fact that they will re-group and re-emerge in future as well, even if they are defeated by the armed forces for now. The feasible strategy in these circumstances appears to be that after acquiring the control of the area, the government should negotiate with the political and religious leaders to ensure that no activities relating to terrorism are tolerated in exchange of peace, justice and economic development of the area. The militia, the police and the Frontier Constabulary should be strengthened and trained to deal with the extremists when the armed forces have completed their mission. An agreement on terms acceptable to both the parties is difficult to achieve, but perhaps this is the only solution. Dr Najeeb A Khan Islamabad http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=206792 .... Lagay Raho, Media Bhai Wednesday, November 04, 2009 By By Sadiq Saleem On Monday, November 2, thirty-five innocent Pakistanis lost their lives to a terrorist attack. These were ordinary people, standing in line at a bank to receive their monthly salary. They must have gone there with plans of spending that money on their parents, wives, children, brothers and sisters. But for the Pakistani media, especially the TV anchors who have now become the arbiters of what is important and what is not, the death of these poor people was not important. With their usual cast of characters from —Jamaat-e-Islami to Imran Khan to the two Muslim Leagues— the electronic media that day was exclusively focused on the so-called NRO issue. Although the PPP has defused the matter by withdrawing the ordinance from Parliament, there is something artificial about the manner in which the matter of the NRO was made the primary focus of national discussion. The NRO issue took over from debate over the Kerry Lugar Bill, which also died its natural death. Those in the media who considered the Kerry-Lugar Bill a matter of national sovereignty have not even asked the PML-N or PML-Q to bring their own resolutions in the National Assembly on the matter. Now that Hillary Clinton has spoken, the two Muslims Leagues would not dare condemn the US through a resolution in Parliament. The purpose of the fuss over the bill, like the NRO non-debate, was to undermine the Zardari presidency. The Pakistani military is fighting the battle for the country’s survival in Waziristan. For years at least some of our anchors have claimed that the Mehsud militants are backed by foreign enemies of Pakistan. But neither the war in Waziristan nor the terrorist attacks in Rawalpindi have received the kind of attention that befits them. For the overzealous TV anchors, the real issue is how to embarrass President Zardari. Some of them claim they have the establishments backing in doing so. Those striving for a Constitutional knockout of President Zardari need to reconsider whether they will accomplish anything even if they succeed. The media, especially its electronic manifestation, seems like a bunch of quacks (fake doctors) that keep generating campaign after campaign against someone they dislike (President Zardari). It is time the people fight back and say let there be some sanity in the country. Let priorities be priorities. Like the title of the Hindi movie Lagay Raho Munna Bhai, we need to learn to ignore the TV anchors and say Lagay Raho media Bhai and pay attention to the lives of people instead of the artificial politics of talk shows. If the talk show crowd has evidence of corruption, let them take it to the independent judiciary, which they claim they got restored. If there is an issue that requires Parliamentary attention, let Parliament vote on it. It is time for real action, not media campaigns. For twenty-four hours after a tragedy like the Rawalpindi terrorist attack, the nation should be allowed to grieve and sympathize with the victims. The media and the establishment some anchors so frequently quote should give the people a break. http://www.thenews.com.pk/print1.asp?id=206763 ... The electronic media’s coverage of terrorist attacks has often left much to be desired. The not-so-thin line between reporting the news and wallowing in sensationalism has been crossed repeatedly, and the distinction between fact and speculation lost in situations that call for composure and clarity. Some anchors and reporters caught up in such settings are known to have become hysterical, throwing perspective to the wind. During the first attack on the Manawan police training centre, for instance, the casualty figure was initially inflated ten-fold before someone somewhere acknowledged that it was too early to tell what was happening on the ground. Imagine the impact such ‘reporting’ might have had on family members whose relatives were trapped in the training centre at the time. Consider the wider panic whipped up by the media, wholly unnecessarily, in these days of unprecedented fear and loathing. At least one gas-cylinder blast has been reported as a bomb explosion. Clearly, facts were not checked before being presented as news. Not too long ago, the movement of rescue commandos was splashed across television screens, potentially leaking vital information to the hostage-takers via their associates on the outside. Anyone with access to a television set — and that includes children — has been bombarded with gruesome, gory images of both the victims and perpetrators of terrorism. That wasn’t diligent journalism, and added nothing to the viewers’ understanding of the news. What it did was further terrify an already brutalised nation. Conversely, it may have also desensitised people who may come to conflate tragedy with routine. It happens all the time in Pakistan, what else is new. How many dead, what was the ‘score’ this time? No child or young adult should grow up thinking that way. http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/14-terrorism-coverage-zj-01

Shahid Masood is the biggest liar…. an opportunist… who sold his soul to the devil whom he now is trying to criticise….. listen to his interview in Jawabdey… this liar is totally exposed by Iftikhar…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=271iEYoCMo0

Aamir Mughal said: Irfan Siddiqui was once a regular contributor for Weekly Takbeer [Allegedly an Islamic Weekly whose Founder Editor Syed Salahuddin [favourite of Shaheen Sehbai] was murdered in 90s. Details: Ethnic Hatred - Mawdudi, Jamat-e-Islami & Islami Jamiat Talaba

http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/04/ethnic-hatred-mawdudi-jamat-e-islami.html

Irfan Siddiqui used to be PRO in President House of Pakistan, and I wonder did he serve Tummandar Farooq Laghari.

In the words of Sadiq Saleem: Watching American Secretary of State Hillary Clinton interact with university students in Lahore was a sad spectacle. Sadder still was to see our most influential TV anchors and columnists betray their limited knowledge of facts while trying to impress their audience with their solid nationalist credentials...The most glaring error of fact by a Pakistani came during Ms Clinton’s interview with Pakistani TV anchors. One gentleman (Talat Hussain) tried to make the point that the US does not provide enough assistance to Pakistan and that Pakistan’s leaders sell the country cheap. He said that the US paid Kyrgyzstan $700 million in rent for just one airbase. Hillary tried to correct him and said the actual amount of rent was around $50 million. Our anchor-columnist was unfazed and insisted that must be the figure per month. But anyone with access to the internet can find out that as of June this year the US pays Kyrgyzstan $60 million per year as rent for the Manas air force base. Until June the rent was only $17 million.

Hillary was closer to the facts while the anchor-columnist was off by at least $640 million. His hostility towards the US, not facts, defined his question and none of his anchor colleagues were better acquainted with facts to help correct him.

....

Dr Shahid Masood of GEO fame – was appointed as the PTV chairman, through the Establishment Division letter No 1/64/2008-E-6, dated May 31 2008.He was given the additional charge of the MD through the letter No 1/64/2008-E-6, dated June 21 2008. Here is his pay package.

After his appointment as MD PTV, Dr. Shahid Masood has been seen appeasing President Musharraf and endorsing the President’s views. See the video here.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2ghAXpfOtlg

It is the same President Musharraf who was termed as an unpopular Shah of Pakistan, by Dr. Shahid Masood in one of his degrading programs of ‘Meray Mutabik’ where he painted a picture of similarity between Shah Iran and President Musharraf – predicting that soon President Musharraf will have no place to hide. Does Shahid Masood have any shame left? Does he have the moral courage to face the public and offer apology over his twisting programs and exploiting the nation's emotions?

Does anyone remember Dr Shahid Masood's encounter with Iftikhar Ahmed in Jawabdeh and further post-mortem by Kamran Khan the next evening? It is a must watch.

http://letusbuildpakistan.blogspot.com/2008/11/dr-shahid-masood-in-jawabdeh-lifafah.html

http://letusbuildpakistan.blogspot.com/2009/08/dr-shahid-masoods-campaign-against.html

http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/09/05/geo-tv-kamran-khan-and-the-lies-of-dr-shahid-masood/

Najam Sethi rightly points out in his editorial in the Friday Times:

1- The Pakistani “free media”, with its religious-nationalist mindset, is singularly responsible for misleading the people and creating a huge wave of sympathy for the Taliban and hostility for the government and army that want to fight them.

2- This “free media” created a wave of sympathy and support for the Lal Masjid terrorists (portrayed as some sort of medieval heroes for defying America and the army) in the heart of Islamabad and put the army and government on the back foot.

3- This media also made this war America’s war exclusively by propagating the false notion that if America were to walk away from this region the Taliban and Al-Qaeda would melt away into thin air and all would be peaceful again.

4- Ultimately, this “free media” drummed up support for all the dangerous peace deals between the Taliban and the army or government, especially the last one in Swat on February 28, and enabled the Taliban to exploit the political space and public support to seize large areas of the Frontier.

God help Pakistan – if these blackmailers and Taliban mind-set journalists are what we earned by ‘Freedom of Media’ !


Read more...

Saleem Safi: Pervez Musharraf's trial: From rhetoric to reality

Read more...

Two opposite perspectives on drone attacks and Baitullah Mehsud

Irfan Siddiqui (a pro-Taliban journalist) and Latif Chaudhry (a pro-democracy journalist) offer two opposite perspecitves on the US drone attacks on the Taliban/Al Qaeda hideouts in Pakistan.

(Irfan Siddiqui, Daily Jang, 12 August 2009)

(Latif Chaudhry, Daily Express, 12 August 2009)

Finall, why do journalist such as Irfan Siddiqui, Ansar Abbasi, Shahid Masood and Hamid Mir, and politicians such as Nawaz Sharif, Hamid Gul, Aslam Beg, Imran Khan, Qazi Hussain Ahmed have dual standards, Saleem Safi offers a critical analysis:

Read more...

Baitullah Mehsud's death, Rehman Malik and pro-Taliban journalists....

Question: Why is the pro-Taliban lobby of Pakistani jouranlists so much critical of Pakistan's Interior Minister Rehman Malik? Why are Ansar Abbasi, Shahid Masood, Irfan Siddiqi, Orya Mqbool Jan and other pro-Taliban journlaists (Dehshat Nigar) very sad for the last few days?

TTP confirms Mehsud dead, announces 15-day mourning

* Hakeemullah asks govt to prove Baitullah’s death
* US ‘pretty sure’ TTP chief dead

Staff Report (Daily Times)

TANK: The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) confirmed on Monday that the group’s chief, Baitullah Mehsud, had been killed in a US drone strike on Wednesday, and announced a 15-day mourning period, reported a private TV channel.

Newly-appointed TTP spokesman Azam Tariq told the channel the TTP would observe a ceasefire during mourning period. He said a successor to Baitullah had not been chosen yet.

But a close aide of the TTP chief demanded that the government prove Baitullah was dead.

“I challenge (Interior Minister) Rehman Malik to prove that Baitullah is dead,” Hakeemullah, who was reportedly killed in a shootout on Friday, told journalists over the telephone. Hakeemullah said, “I am alive ... I am here to prove that I am alive and so is Baitullah,” he said. “Baitullah is alive and healthy ... he will come before the media soon. There is no succession,” he said.

However, Hakeemullah’s statement that Baitullah is healthy contradicts a statement by another Taliban leader, Maulana Noor Syed, who claimed the TTP chief “is seriously ill”.

Meanwhile, the US is “pretty sure” that Baitullah has been killed, White House Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton said on Monday. He said the development “shows that Pakistan has made progress in moving to root out extremists”.

Read more...

Beware the machinations of the establishment, Prime Minister Gilani.

What the devil…?

By Kamran Shafi
Tuesday, 28 Jul, 2009 (Dawn)

As for Mr Gilani, whose heart seems to be in the right place, one day he says ‘enough is enough’ as if he were about to look President Zardari in the eye and defy him on a host of matters, not least sacking certain Zardari loyalists from the cabinet. —APP/File photo

THERE is so much to talk about this week: the grave danger the IDPs face from the murdering, terrorist yahoos not a single one of whose leaders has been captured or killed; the Commando’s increasingly unbelievable absurdities; the attempt to drive a wedge between Zardari and Gilani; the Supreme Court hearing on the Nov 3 martial law against his own government by the Commando; and last but not least the Kargil fiasco, which the Commando is increasingly calling a great victory.

Kargil first then, and I have to report that it was extremely gratifying to see an Indian TV channel broadcast a programme in which there was an audience listening to, and questioning, Gen V.P. Malik the then chief of staff of the Indian army; a retired colonel who had lost a son in Kargil; the widow of a havildar; a retired young officer who was wounded in Kargil and was down categorised, and who therefore went back to college and joined the corporate world.

The person who impressed me the most was the general, who sat there and took harsh criticism from the audience which was again made up of some who had lost their near and dear ones in Kargil and retired soldiers. A bereaved mother of a captain actually shouted at Malik for not even providing proper boots for the army in Kargil. Indeed, some retired officers blamed the army (and therefore Gen Malik directly) for not standing up to the government and ‘lobbying’ for better service conditions.

The ISPR should collect all our Rommels and Guderians, sit them down in the GHQ auditorium, and show them a recording of this TV programme (aired on CNN-IBN, incidentally). They will see the humility, but also the gentle firmness with which Gen Malik answered the questions and the criticism; they will see how a former COAS of the Indian army spoke with respect when he referred to the Indian government as the preponderant power in the country.

Why pray, may one ask our army brass hats, can’t we have open discussions on what happened in Kargil? With the Commando absconding, the next senior generals involved with the operation could attend and answer people’s questions. Mayhap some mothers of those poor souls killed on our side should like to ask questions too. For example, why did we not, for weeks on end, accept that the dead being shown by the Indians to the world were our dead?

And here we have the Commando actually insisting that Kargil resulted in forcing the Indians to the negotiating table, blithely dancing around the Lahore Declaration signed by prime ministers Nawaz Sharif and Atal Behari Vajpayee which Jawed Naqvi has so well written about in yesterday’s edition of this paper. The Commando is obviously not facing up to the truth, as he is wont to do most times.

Which is not all when it comes to Kargil. He now wants us to believe that Kargil which brought nuclear-armed India and nuclear-armed Pakistan dangerously close to an all-out war and made Pakistan an international pariah was a great victory for Pakistan! Beggars belief, this Commando, especially when, as mentioned in this space earlier, his best buddy Gen Anthony Zinni tells us otherwise.

Yes, what the devil is going on in Swat/Buner, even in Peshawar, let alone in Waziristan and the rest of Fata, where every indication seems to spell out only one simple fact: that the murdering terrorists still hold sway in vast areas of the northwest of our country. If Nato tankers are blown up in the upscale locality of Hayatabad, how in heaven’s name can the IDPs feel safe in Swat and Buner?

If, as evidenced by friends I can trust, the terrorist Mangal Bagh can shake down businesses in Peshawar itself by asking for protection money, how can anyone say the situation is anywhere near ‘under control’ in Swat? How underground could this terrorist be anyway, considering the blatant manner in which he is running his protection rackets?

Will no one wake up and do the right thing even now, and finish off these terrorists? Do our Rommels and Guderians not realise that we are running out of time?

As for Mr Gilani, whose heart seems to be in the right place, one day he says ‘enough is enough’ as if he were about to look President Zardari in the eye and defy him on a host of matters, not least sacking certain Zardari loyalists from the cabinet. And then to go on and repeal the dictatorial aspects of the 17th Amendment, i.e. to emasculate the presidency. Less than a week later his daughter writes a piece in the same newspaper, eulogising the young Bilawal Bhutto Zardari as a leader with vision. Why bite off more than you can chew, Mr Gilani?

Whilst one empathises with Mr Gilani completely, and while one wishes the 17th Amendment were repaired yesterday, one must caution both the president and the prime minister. Democracy is too new after the nine rollicking years that the Commando had, kicking this country about; the problems he has left behind, not least of which is the power crisis, are immense; law and order is non-existent, and baddies roam the land. This is no time for infighting.

To the president one can say that he has been misguided enough by the likes of Fauzia Wahab and Khosa and Awan, in whose acts one can see neither sagacity nor sense. The president should have, and I have said this before, held tightly to the friendly hand offered by Nawaz Sharif and both of them together could have long hence put the country firmly on the road to parliamentary democracy after ridding us of the awful legacy left behind by the Commando. It is not too late even now.

To the prime minister, this: please ask yourself how many people you can bring on to the streets of Multan on your own? You are a member of a political party which has a recognised and established leadership, by virtue of which you are where you are. Likewise for members of the PML-N and the MQM and the ANP: where would any one of them be without their parties and their leaders? Beware the machinations of the establishment, Mr Gilani.

...

Read more...

Journalists of Pakistan - An Analysis

Asadullah Ghalib (Express)



Tahir Sarwar Mir: Did Zardari call journalists as terrorists?


Read more...

Zardari says: "Journalists are biggest terrorists." We say: "Indeed, we must name and shame pro-Taliban yellow journalists..."

While Zardari did not call journalists as terrorists (as confirmed by Farhatullah Babar and Sherry Rehman), he must name and shame certain yellow journalists who support Taliban and radical Islam....

Zardari in controversy over media remark

Islamabad, Jan 19 (PTI) President Asif Zardari was today entangled in a controversy after a section of the media reported that he had described journalists as the "biggest terrorists in Pakistan" during a recent meeting with a group of businessmen.
Information Minister Sherry Rehman and presidential spokesman Farhatullah Babar denied that Zardari had made any comment but the matter was brought up by the opposition PML-N in the National Assembly or lower house of parliament, with lawmaker and columnist Ayaz Amir raising a point of order.

A report in The News daily and on TV channels said Zardari had described journalists as the "biggest terrorists" in the country during a meeting on January 15 with a delegation of the Sarhad Chamber of Commerce and Industry, a business lobby from the North West Frontier Province.

Members of the delegation also quoted Zardari as saying that journalists "misreported things and presented the situation in a non-objective manner".

Other reports have suggested that Zardari was annoyed with sections of the media which had reported that the government had purportedly provided a lot of funds to certain officials to target some journalists who are critical of the Pakistan People's Party-led government.

However, Information Minister Rehman told the National Assembly that the PPP believed in freedom of expression for the media and that Zardari had never uttered any derogatory remarks about journalists.

"President Zardari has very friendly and cordial relations with journalists and he can never even think of uttering such words," Rehman said. PTI

....

Analysis by BBC Urdu dot com

http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2009/01/090119_zardari_media_tension_rh.shtml

....

A summary of hostile, pro-terrorism activities by certain yellow journalists:

Dehshat Nigaar - by Asadullah Ghalib

Confronting militancy and the conspiracy theorists in media - by Raza Rumi

Dalair Singh - a pro-Taliban Pakistani journalist

Regime of hostile TV anchors - Spanking of Kashif Abbasi by Hussain Haqqani

Editorial of Daily News spanking Ansar Abbasi and Hamid Mir

War maniacs must leave Pakistan alone - by Nazir Naji

Hamid Mir in praise of Mullah Abdul Aziz of Lal Masjid

Dr. Shahid Masood exposed in Jawabdeh

The media-jihadi-mullah campaign against secular forces in Pakistan

Lies and corruption of Ansar Abbasi exposed in these articles

....

Some Comments

mammu Says:
January 19th, 2009 at 12:15 pm

for a long time i have stop trusting any news which is bases on speculations and “Un-Named sources”

thats why i dnt consider it as a news.
Its a speculation or at most a hearsay.

while the truth this is the first Governement which has opened all the TV channels which were banned.
its the government which has never Stopped a TV channel from Broadcasting even the most absurd programs.



source doesn’t mean the news

why cannot they find a single person who could come in front and say that Yes Zardari said this to me.
rather than quoting some ‘anonymous’ sources.



and secondly this Jang Group already lost its credibility the cheap way they are targeting the Daughter of Justice Dogger.
its simple pathetic that you dnt like some one and they start looking into the matters of their sons,daughters and wives.

Its simple cheap.

Zahid.Ilyas Says:
January 19th, 2009 at 4:27 pm

Let my first make it clear that i am not at all supporter of PPP..I really agree that present gov is not better than previous in any aspect except the fact that present gov is the elected one and constitutionally protected..It really sucks..At the same time i must say that Thenews and Geo group is not impartial either. I have this feeling that they are tilted towards NS party.
Read more...

What is the USA? (Ansar Abbasi = Dalair Singh must read this column by Nazir Naji)

Ansar Abbasi (Dalair Singh) and all other pseduo-intellectuals, media faces of Taliban, champions of yellow journalism, and drawing room politicians, who would like Pakistan to confront the USA and the international community in the manner Mullah Omar and Saddam Hussain did must read this op-ed by Nazir Naji.



Read more...

Dehshat Nigar, Bhutto Haters, Zardari Phobia and the Pakistani media - by Asadullah Ghalib

Read more...

Intellectual terrorists (Dehshat Nigar) - This column criticises the supporters of Taliban & Sipah-e-Sahaba e.g. Ansar Abbasi, Mushtaq Minhas etc

Dehshat Gard and Dehshat Nigar

By Asadullah Ghalib (Express) Perhaps, this column is also a criticism on Aftab Iqbal for his unwarranted anti-India statements. Aftab Iqbal wants all Pakistani to suffer from India-phobia exactly as per the wishes of his masters in ISI.



Read more...

War on terror is Pakistan's own war —Ijaz Hussain

Is this our war? —Ijaz Hussain

The mere ownership of the war by the government is not enough to fight it effectively. It is imperative that the people own it too

Ever since Pakistan joined the US-led war on terror in 2001, controversy has raged on whether it is our war or America’s. When Pervez Musharraf ruled the roost, his government owned it while most political parties, including his own PMLQ, refused to. Despite this divide, the debate on the ownership of the war remained low-key.

The devastating Marriott bomb blast has, among other things, revived this debate as never before. Whereas the Pakistan government has reaffirmed its ownership, opposition political parties and the public at large do not seem convinced. Given the shrill, passionate debate that has taken place on the issue in the media following the Marriott tragedy, the divide seems to have widened. Further, it has raised the question: why, if it is our war, has the government failed to sell it to the public?

There is little doubt that when we joined the war, it was not ours. The Musharraf government owned it because the Bush administration imposed it on us as testified by the reported infamous threat by Richard Armitage to bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age if we did not join the effort.

As a consequence, we abandoned the Taliban and helped the US capture Kabul. Musharraf justified the volte-face on the ground of protecting Pakistan’s vital national interests such as the nuclear assets, the Kashmir cause, etc. However, he failed to mention his own survival as president, which must have factored in this decision.

The war started becoming ours too when Al Qaeda and Taliban escapees from the American bombing started pouring into our tribal areas. With the passage of time they consolidated their positions and as the resistance against foreign forces in Afghanistan picked up, they, along with the Pakistani Taliban, started using these sanctuaries for operations across the Durand Line.

To stop them from doing so, the Musharraf government introduced Pakistani troops in the tribal areas. It did so because in addition to American pressure, international law (chapter on international state responsibility) obligated it to stop elements from using its territory against Afghanistan. Besides, the UNSC resolution on terrorism also required it to fight against them, failing which sanctions could be imposed. It is undeniable that the Pakistani tribals feel free to mount military operations across the border as they do not recognise the Durand Line. However, international law takes no cognisance of this argument.

The war also became ours when the terrorists decided to cause mayhem not only in the tribal areas but also across the length and breadth of Pakistan. They are doing so with the objective of pressurising the government to abandon support for the Bush administration in its war on terror and letting them use Pakistani territory for military operations in Afghanistan. The terrorists also seek to incrementally take over the whole or part of the state of Pakistan and run it according to their ideology. One has sporadic glimpses of this strategy in areas where the Pakistan government has lost its writ in favour of the Taliban.

This is also our war in another sense. The Taliban ideology at present being practiced in parts of Pakistan is nothing but evil incarnate. Even its milder version, practiced when they were in power in Kabul during 1996-2001, was no less evil because it struck at the roots of the progressive and moderate worldview of Islam that we cherish.

If tomorrow the Taliban succeed in militarily chasing foreign forces out of Afghanistan and establish their own government there, they would pose a threat to Pakistan’s polity. Those who reject it as an alarmist view and believe that the Taliban government in Afghanistan would be as benign towards Pakistan as the one that flourished there during the late 1990s are sadly mistaken. Flushed with victory in Afghanistan, this time the Taliban may not rest until they overpower nuclear Pakistan.

Had Musharraf not committed the ‘original sin’ of joining the Bush’s war on terror, could we have been spared the agony of owning it? Our answer is in the negative because even if Pakistan had refused to join it, the terrorists would have forced it on us.

This is so because they would have mounted operations against foreign forces across the Durand Line, which we would not have been able to stop. That in turn would have invited American attacks on the Pakistani territory, as is the case at the moment.

If it is our war as shown above, why has the Pakistani government failed to sell it to the people? There are four main reasons.

First, as is well known, it has failed because of the American dimension of the issue. The US is highly unpopular in the Muslim world for a host of reasons, which includes not only its occupation of two Muslim lands but also the blind support that it extends to Israel against the Palestinians. Besides, the way the Bush Administration has conducted the so-called war on terror has given rise to a common perception in the Muslim world that the US is waging a crusade against Islam instead of fighting terrorism.

Resultantly, Muslims generally hate the US, which in turn has made them lose sight of the fact that American and the Muslim interests could coincide as is the case at present, though the two differ, inter alia, on the methodology to deal with it.

Second, the government has failed to market this war because of the gullibility of our people. The latter are generally so driven by religion they can be easily duped by any clever operator. Taking advantage of this weakness, the Pakistani clerics who have their own axe to grind have taken a line that encourages sympathy rather than revulsion against Taliban.

For example, they believe that the Taliban government that ruled Afghanistan during 1996-2001 was the closest ever to the Khulfa-e-Rashidin. Similarly, though they denounce suicide bombings as un-Islamic, they consistently refuse to support the government against the Taliban unless it disassociates itself from the US and/or enforces sharia in the country.

Third, there is constant propaganda that the government is guilty of genocide against its own people. This argument has lot of appeal for the common man though it is utterly fallacious because if the terrorists are bent upon forcing their views upon the people through suicide bombings and other acts of violence, should the government treat them with kid glove methods simply because they are our own people?

Fortunately, Asfandyar Wali Khan, who until recently was one of the principal protagonists of this viewpoint (which he often combined with the lethal plea that military operations in FATA and Swat were a conspiracy against Pukhtuns), has abandoned it with the ascent to power of his ANP. However, notwithstanding this development, the argument continues to have wide appeal, which stops people from owning this war.

Fourth, the government lacks credibility. For example, many believe that suicide bombings and other acts of violence are the handiwork of secret agencies, and that the Taliban living in caves are incapable of mounting sophisticated operations like the Marriott bombing. A variant of this line is the plea by Islamist parties that these atrocious acts are perpetrated by foreign agencies like RAW and Mossad, and that no Muslim can ever imagine to kill another Muslim. Though both arguments are nothing but rubbish, many people believe them. The Taliban are the net beneficiaries of this situation.

It is clear that the mere ownership of the war by the government is not enough to fight it effectively. It is imperative that the people own it too. This can only come about if the government conducts a systematic analysis of the factors that make the people shun the war, and then makes concerted efforts to shape public opinion to its viewpoint. It seems to have done neither. Unless it is prepared to undertake this gargantuan task, it may not win this war.

The writer is a former dean of social sciences at the Quaid-i-Azam University. He can be reached at hussain_ijaz@hotmail.com (Daily Times)
Read more...

Rauf Klasra exposes the Taliban loving journalists in Pakistan...

Ansar Abbasi, Kashif Abbasi, Hamid Mir, and other Taliban lovers will be the first ones to migrate to the USA and the UK if Taliban takeover Islamabad

By Rauf Klasra




The pro-terrorist journalists and scholars such as Ansar Abbasi, Kashif Abbasi, Hamid Mir, Hamid Gul, Roedad Khan, and other Taliban lovers will be the first ones to migrate to the USA and the UK if Taliban takeover Islamabad.
Read more...

Ansar Abbasi, Irfan Siddiqi, other PPP haters and their 'Khopay' - Disinformation cell against democracy in Pakistan - By Dr. Babar Awan

(Dr Babar Awan)
Read more...

Zardari, Sarah Palin, pro-Taliban journalists and the disinformation cell by the democracy haters - By Abbas Ather

Abbas Ather
Read more...